The Politics Thread (PLAY NICELY!)

A rich person is nothing at all without the society they're rich in. "Rich" does not exist as an independent concept. What we define as rich is mostly numbers in some computers somewhere. Might as well be air without many millions of people who value those numbers well enough.
Do they deserve reward for hard work they might do? Sure, but everyone does. And taxes are a way to try to keep it fair. Because realistically it's nonsense that some people get like a million times or more for their work compared to others.

Are you scared by the idea that your own well-being might not be the result of your infinite wisdom but rather the result of luck? Sure doesn't sound as impressive...

Excuse the tangent, but has this become the biggest thread on the forum? I gotta say I enjoy the activity.

Debate <3

I'm pretty sure the wip faction thread is the biggest.

Edit: the real life picture thread is bigger.

So @mered4 what's your idea on climate change, just curious.

DAMMIT PRO. I was trying to not reply because Colins argument is so basic that it's not even worth arguing.

I guess il ignore it.

Anyway. I see you've joined the "poke Mered for fun times" club.

Climate change is a symbol of the Earth's natural cycle. To generalize, it gets warmer, then it gets colder, and then it sometimes stays cool for a while, and then it gets warm again.... Basically, mankind is far too optimistic about our control of the planet. We are a small part of a larger whole. Man-made global warming or climate change or whatever the "scientists" are calling it these days is a huge joke. Especially after climategate.

I can post some links but it would take me a bit to find em.

Yeah never trust those people

Nah was just curious.
It's fascinating to hear about different views.

I actually do think that in certain areas(pharma and nutrition being big), that it hard to tell the difference between real science and science skewed by conflicts of interest.

Verifying the validity of a study is hard enough without investigating potential data cherry-picking.

Well i'll be honest i'm flabberghasted it bypassed my Scale Megathread. Major props @stuart98

of wich you are the grand vizir. Let's see if you give him justification...

:')

yeah a new theory of everything that made what you say make sence would somehow have to be invented x'D

oh boy. The vague insults continue from tatsu! What quality content.....

Especially when Mered is throwing tables. Or so I've heard.

This natural cycle of warming and cooling is normally over the course of thousands of years. Our climate is changing rapidly over centuries, even decades. Natural climate change definitely exists, nobody will argue that. However it does not go as fast as we are causing. This rapid change is increasing the amount of time we see natural desasters last/occur. Our air streams are changing, our oceans are rising, and weather is ******* multiple parts of the US. By the end of this century many places will be under water. We already have roads beginning to fill at high tide.

This isn't just down to factories and cars and etc. We are producing a lot of methane and carbon dioxide with livestock as well. We're clearing forests of carbon dioxide soaking-oxygen producing trees. This isn't about polar bears living on smaller chunks of ice in the artic, this is about our coastal lines rising. Engulfing places.

Except there isn't any direct, meaningful evidence that such drastic change is taking place. Sea levels aren't rising significantly. The temperature changes predicted just aren't happening. Extreme weather isn't more frequent, just more devastating.

I'm happy to accept that our climate is changing. However, I think it's quite optimistic to believe we humans can change the Earth's climate on a long term and large scale when we can't even predict weather patterns accurately - even by accident.

We're a small part of the world's ecosystem.

I also think the issue is heavily weighted by political and financial bias. Proponents of climate change reform (ones with power) usually have a direct stake in the solutions presented. The UN has been trying to use climate change for years to 'unify' the world under its supervision/rule. They've been so far unsuccessful (bureaucracy sux), but they'll keep trying till they get it right.

?

Mered continues to find the polar opposite of my opinions. No matter the topic.

There's no proof for global warming.

Except the proof that people have outlined that I'm going to ignore because it's a beaurocratic conspiracy.

Climate is time-averaged weather. Weather is a complex, chaotic and dynamic system that we can only simulate and can only accurately simulate if we can measure it with infinite precision. Which we can never do (and if you happen to find an analytical solution for the equations, you'll earn millions).

Climate however, is more the area of statistics. It's actually a lot easier to tell what the climate was 1000 years ago than predicting next month's weather. Climate is simply time-averaged weather in a certain place. It's difficult to tell how cold it will be in antarctica next week, but climate-wise, we can confidently say it'll be cold.

This is why even a few degrees of global temperature change is a big deal. 3 degrees less and we have an ice age.