Thread Rating:

Poll

11 votes (15.94%)
45 votes (65.21%)
13 votes (18.84%)

69 members have voted

darkoz
darkoz 
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 247
  • Posts: 7791
February 1st, 2021 at 5:28:29 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

This is the comment that I was referring to, " I still belive [sic] had we done a much more rigorous proper lock down accros [sic] the world we could have confined much sooner. Unfortunately, I don't know if that was ever even a remote possibility. "



Meh, it's too contextual.

Axel may have been referring to the antics of certain political leaders

But he also may have been referring to how difficult human nature is in reacting (i.e. AZ and DRich not caring).

"Proper lock down accros the world" would imply the latter since there is no global political party
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
  • Threads: 149
  • Posts: 19135
February 1st, 2021 at 5:50:43 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

This is the comment that I was referring to, " I still belive [sic] had we done a much more rigorous proper lock down accros [sic] the world we could have confined much sooner. Unfortunately, I don't know if that was ever even a remote possibility. "

Ok, but, How is that political? I have no doubt someone can turn it into something political, but it seems you can turn just about any conversation into something political.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 109
  • Posts: 7706
February 1st, 2021 at 7:35:03 AM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: Wizard

This is the comment that I was referring to, " I still belive [sic] had we done a much more rigorous proper lock down accros [sic] the world we could have confined much sooner. Unfortunately, I don't know if that was ever even a remote possibility. "

Ok, but, How is that political? I have no doubt someone can turn it into something political, but it seems you can turn just about any conversation into something political.



Axel is correct. The initial statement is not a political one. The follow up statement, likely to be.... Governor X prevented it, or President Y was too stupid to fully enforce it .... is when it BECOMES political. Stating the fact that 'had we done a more rigorous lockdown would have confined it sooner' is not a political statement.
unJon
unJon 
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 2362
February 1st, 2021 at 7:55:44 AM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: Wizard

This is the comment that I was referring to, " I still belive [sic] had we done a much more rigorous proper lock down accros [sic] the world we could have confined much sooner. Unfortunately, I don't know if that was ever even a remote possibility. "

Ok, but, How is that political? I have no doubt someone can turn it into something political, but it seems you can turn just about any conversation into something political.



Axel is correct. The initial statement is not a political one. The follow up statement, likely to be.... Governor X prevented it, or President Y was too stupid to fully enforce it .... is when it BECOMES political. Stating the fact that 'had we done a more rigorous lockdown would have confined it sooner' is not a political statement.



So Axel is like a political gateway drug?
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
teliot
teliot
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 2159
February 1st, 2021 at 8:29:59 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Mankind only has about 1000 years left in any case.

If by 1000 years you mean 5-30 years, I agree. The current mass-extinction event is accelerating. All we need is one good ice-free Arctic early in the summer and the average Arctic temperature will spike up by 2-5 degrees C and disrupt normal climate patterns worldwide. That is not survivable. The current estimate is sometime before 2035 for the first ice free Arctic event.

Picture it this way, you have a cold drink with a bunch of ice in it and you apply heat. As long as a single bit of ice remains in the drink, the drink will remain cold, roughly around the freezing point. But apply that same amount of heat to a drink with no ice and the drink will quickly get hot. Same with the Arctic. Once the Arctic thaws, the temperatures will spike uncontrollably.

There are many sources of info on this phenomena. The future is not about sea level rise or gradual global warming, although both will be a challenge. It's about an ice-free Arctic. And it's too late to do anything about it.

Here's a fun read:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2020.615419/full
Personal website: www.ijmp.org
OnceDear
Administrator
OnceDear
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
  • Threads: 45
  • Posts: 4955
Thanks for this post from:
RogerKint
February 1st, 2021 at 8:31:06 AM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: Wizard

This is the comment that I was referring to, " I still belive [sic] had we done a much more rigorous proper lock down accros [sic] the world we could have confined much sooner. Unfortunately, I don't know if that was ever even a remote possibility. "

Ok, but, How is that political? I have no doubt someone can turn it into something political, but it seems you can turn just about any conversation into something political.

I don't define it as political, but as controversial. It's easy for us to see close alignment between highly charged political opinions and similarly charged mask/vaccine opinions and in some cases they are proxies for eachother.
But rule 19 covers it fine.
Quote: rule 19

Controversial Speech: In an effort to keep the focus of the forum on gambling, Vegas, and math, comments of a political, racial, religious, sexual, or otherwise controversial nature are not allowed. We recommend taking such discussion elsewhere (Added 8/13/19).

We know well enough when we are being controversial.
Take care out there. Spare a thought for the newly poor who were happy in their world just a few days ago, but whose whole way of life just collapsed..
OnceDear
Administrator
OnceDear
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
  • Threads: 45
  • Posts: 4955
Thanks for this post from:
teliot
February 1st, 2021 at 8:36:15 AM permalink
Quote: teliot

If by 1000 years you mean 5-30 years, I agree. The current mass-extinction event is accelerating. All we need is one good ice-free Arctic early in the summer and the average global temperature will go up by 2-5 degrees C. That is not survivable. The current estimate is sometime before 2035 for the first ice free Arctic event.

Picture it this way, you have a cold drink with a bunch of ice in it and you apply heat. As long as a single bit of ice remains in the drink, the drink will remain cold, roughly around the freezing point. But apply that same amount of heat to a drink with no ice and the drink will quickly get hot. Same with the Arctic. Once the Arctic thaws, the temperatures globally will spike uncontrollably.

There are many sources of info on this phenomena. The future is not about sea level rise or gradual global warming, although both will be a challenge. It's about an ice-free Arctic. And it's too late to do anything about it.

It's a phenomenon called latent heat. We can drive more and more heat energy into a chunk of ice and it will stay at or below 0C. But once it melts, it's temperature can rise almost proportionately to heat input.
Take care out there. Spare a thought for the newly poor who were happy in their world just a few days ago, but whose whole way of life just collapsed..
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 224
  • Posts: 12332
February 1st, 2021 at 8:39:22 AM permalink
Quote: teliot

If by 1000 years you mean 5-30 years, I agree. The current mass-extinction event is accelerating. All we need is one good ice-free Arctic early in the summer and the average global temperature will go up by 2-5 degrees C. That is not survivable. The current estimate is sometime before 2035 for the first ice free Arctic event.

Picture it this way, you have a cold drink with a bunch of ice in it and you apply heat. As long as a single bit of ice remains in the drink, the drink will remain cold, roughly around the freezing point. But apply that same amount of heat to a drink with no ice and the drink will quickly get hot. Same with the Arctic. Once the Arctic thaws, the temperatures globally will spike uncontrollably.

There are many sources of info on this phenomena. The future is not about sea level rise or gradual global warming, although both will be a challenge. It's about an ice-free Arctic. And it's too late to do anything about it.



I remember hearing we would have an ice free arctic by now. "SANTA'S WORKSHOP IS UNDER WATER" the news said. Yet we still have plenty of ice. 1000-10000 years ago we had glaciers halfway down North America. Yet all remains well. 2-5C you would probably not notice. Meanwhile ice at the South Pole is thicker than ever.

But if it happens as part of the 4.5 billion year climate cycle well nothing we can do about that. Just the earth shaking us off like the fleas we are to it.

Meanwhile, let it warm up here by me. I hate the cold winters.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
teliot
teliot
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 2159
Thanks for this post from:
Hunterhill
February 1st, 2021 at 8:48:49 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

I remember hearing we would have an ice free arctic by now.

Regardless of the cause, man made or natural, the inevitability of an ice-free Arctic in the near term is no longer in dispute. You could educate yourself or not, I honestly don't care, but the future is already written and it will be in our lifetimes.

But, if you feel like taking a moment to educate yourself, just once to take a different approach to your way of arguing with and replying to folks, here is a source of some great visuals on what is happening:

https://sites.uci.edu/zlabe/arctic-sea-ice-figures/

Often times, the less someone knows about a subject, the more fiercely they will defend their position. This is known as confirmation bias.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
Personal website: www.ijmp.org
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 109
  • Posts: 7706
February 1st, 2021 at 9:57:32 AM permalink
Quote: OnceDear

We know well enough when we are being controversial.



TOTALLY DISAGREE! There have been NUMEROUS posts by NUMEROUS members stating that the moderation here is UNABLE to fairly and unbiasedly decide what is a controversial comment!

(Please see the intentional irony and don't suspend me!)
Last edited by: unnamed administrator on Feb 1, 2021

  • Jump to: