The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Snow Snow beautiful snow.

Snow Snow beautiful snow.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 11
  7. 12
  8. 13
  9. Page 14
  10. 15
  11. 16
  12. All
cont'd ...

I'd just like to add a few thoughts on "labelling"
people.

According to Psychology Today, some people often label
others by the characteristics that they think these others
project at a given time. It usually deals with views that
are contrary to theirs.

This labelling may seem to be a reasonable reflection of how
these others may present themselves at that time. But it
is not accurate to think that their behaviour reflects that
person's entire and often complex persona. Because if we
use rather narrow terminology to describe what people
are saying at a given point in time or just on any one
issue - it limits the complete picture of that person and
also tends to indicate that these people cannot change.

Psychology Today tell us that what is needed is to think
about people's personalities in a less fixed way because it
is important to realize that we should not completely
define people only by their given behaviour at any
point in time. Circumstances do change as do people.
Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 15 August 2019 2:36:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear mhaze,

Lol.

I will admit though I am struggling to follow your last posts. I think you may be trying a little too hard. Time to take a deep breath.

All I did was pose a simple question, well simple to me at least, for you to answer;

“So young scout pray tell us what has driven the CO2 levels from under 320 to over 400ppm since 1960?”

And you immediately slunk away with;

“But I’m sorry. I draw the line at having to explain to you your own fantasy-world.”

In a way I don't blame you. Having your inadequacies on full display is not very edifying. But I put it to you again, what has driven the CO2 levels from under 320 to over 400ppm since 1960?

This would be relatively simple for a great student of climate science as you seem to deem yourself. Obfuscation really should not be your refuge yet again. So how about it hombre?
Posted by SteeleRedux, Thursday, 15 August 2019 5:35:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh, snow, it was extremely unexpected, it was very cool;)
Posted by Shirik, Friday, 16 August 2019 5:33:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy, just 2 questions.

If all this pollution you can somehow find is so bad, how come we are all living longer healthier lives.

If CO2 is so effective, how come those climate scientists you so revere have to keep downgrading all their projections, & have had to do so for over a decade.

mhaze, you must stop using all those long words. We really should not use words of more than 2 syllabus, it makes SR even more confused.
Posted by Hasbeen, Friday, 16 August 2019 6:04:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Hasbeen,

In the preindustrial societies human technology made
comparatively little demand on the resources of the
environment. Populations were relatively small, and for
the most part people's material needs were fairly limited
and easily satisfied.

Industrialisation, however, has brought about rapid
population increases and also an endless expanse in
people's material desires.

Yes, we're living longer thanks to technology but
most technologically advanced societies are now digging
deeper into the planetary environment for the raw materials
and energy they need to fuel their economic development.
Thus causing problems.

As for the variance in scientific predictions? Conditions
change. However, things are getting worse, not better.
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 16 August 2019 6:56:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Put your bias and opinion about this subject in the bucket at the door
Having done that enter the room without any view
Now concentrate on only this
*How did the two sides two views come about*
How did we split on belief in the sciences, the causes, the danger if any
Now tell me no one influenced this debate
More importantly why
IF we near overnight, saw coal no longer in use, petroleum products too, millions of service stations closed for ever
Would the fear of that huge loss the turmoil be reason to power one side of the debate
Posted by Belly, Saturday, 17 August 2019 5:57:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 11
  7. 12
  8. 13
  9. Page 14
  10. 15
  11. 16
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy