scherado

33 minutes ago, rangerx said:

 

I edited the post to remove the redundancy just moments before you posted your response.

However as to the second question, I'm pretty sure a ten year old with reasonably average intelligence could answer the question, unequivocally.

Alrighty then, it's settled.

15 minutes ago, beecee said:

I said and asked, "would you kill to protect some bit of amendment written in 1790, after a bloody war for independence? You don't believe in the year 2017 that such a thing is now grossly outdated"?

You answered as follows.

5 hours ago, scherado said:

That might be the most easy to answer: No.

4 hours ago, scherado said:

I wasn't being smug. I was sincere that I can answer without equivocation as I've examined repeatedly and exhaustively my opinion on the matter, the quite specific question you asked.

I repeat: I have arrived at the answer after careful, extensive consideration over decades. I am at a loss to explain how this is interpreted as smug. Let's be clear and agree the examined opinion is superior to knee-jerk reaction. I can't believe I had to type that.

3 hours ago, scherado said:

The topic is an act of violence that has yet to be categorized.

in this post, I am explicit that this thread is NOT about gun control though others may want to discuss that in the thread dedicated to that EXACT topic ==> That thread

If it turns out that Paddock was NOT radicalized either politically or religiously (as "radical Islamic terrorist") then I will consider discussing "gun control"--but it will be in "da thread" at the link after "EXACT topic".

3 minutes ago, rangerx said:

It's infinitely more educational to skeptically trust the authority of an erudite than blindly accept the indoctrination of an ideologue

Do you want to reconsider that statement?

4 minutes ago, rangerx said:

By the way, I asked a second question,

5 minutes ago, rangerx said:

Given this fact, the "straight" answer to your first question is that I will need to search and read about this cause, effect and putative relationship to anthropegenic global warming and return with my conclusion.

48 minutes ago, scherado said:

After that eventuality, I will tackle the second question.

1 hour ago, scherado said:

What part of the "rising global sea-levels" topic do you support (agree with) and attribute to anthropogenic cause?

8 minutes ago, rangerx said:

And I already answered your question, which seems to have fallen on blind eyes, so I'll repeat it in a manner that might.


It's not my field of expertise.

On what basis would I be required to answer your question when "it is not my field of expertise", but you are not required to answer mine for the same reason?

Did I lose you?

3 minutes ago, Arete said:

There are literally thousands of empirical studies demonstrating that at the majority of observed contemporary climate change is caused by human activity. 

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024

 

Having just now read your post and, hence, not yet evaluated it's truth-value, that kind of information, if actually true plus the number--thousands--being actually true, would constitute the persuasive evidence to which I alluded in a previous post.

None of my posts in this thread allude to or hint at anything to do with the subject of carbonic acid as an effect of the cause "carbon dioxide mixing with seawater", which is most definitely not my field of expertise. Given this fact, the "straight" answer to your first question is that I will need to search and read about this cause, effect and putative relationship to anthropegenic global warming and return with my conclusion.

After that eventuality, I will tackle the second question.

While I do those, do you have an answer to:

33 minutes ago, scherado said:

What part of the "rising global sea-levels" topic do you support (agree with) and attribute to anthropogenic cause?

3 hours ago, waitforufo said:

http://reason.com/blog/2017/10/04/black-lives-matter-students-shut-down-th

So liberalism is dead.  Long live the brownshirts of Black Lives Matter.  Who needs that old white man's document, The Constitution of the United States", anyway.

What are you attempting to convey with the quality "white" in the third sentence? (The "old" descriptor indicates a prejudiced/bigoted maladjustment with respect to age; the "man" characteristic, a.k.a. genitalia, indicates a sexist prejudiced/bigoted maladjustment with respect to sex-type.)

46 minutes ago, rangerx said:

What part carbon dioxide mixing with seawater creating carbonic acid do you not understand?

What part of the "rising global sea-levels" topic do you support (agree with) and attribute to anthropogenic cause?

44 minutes ago, CharonY said:

How does it have anything to do with the topic?

The topic is an act of violence that has yet to be categorized. I have been studying, informally, the subject since September 11, 2001 when, on that day I was living in the New York State County that is the third above NYCity, near the Hudson River over which two of the hijacked jets flew and over my head as headed South towards the Twin Towers. My Sister's husband flew out the exact airport (Boston) on that exact day, that morning, from which two of the planes that hit the Towers were hijacked and we didn't know whether he was on one of them until we spoke to him.

24 minutes ago, iNow said:

Your understanding is wrong. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_of_recent_climate_change#Scientific_literature_and_opinion

https://www.skepticalscience.com/Are-humans-too-insignificant-to-affect-global-climate-intermediate.htm

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/human-contribution-to-gw-faq.html#.WdWCfXpOmhA

I will look at the ones below the wiki-pee-D-uh as I reject out of hand those from the first link: I have been boycotting that site for more, probably, 10 years and won't reverse that decision.

Rut Roh, I happened to see this article while minding my own business: Troubles in Switzerland, apparently.

Keller-Messahli does not mince words. The relentless spread of jihadist Islam in Switzerland, and the see-no-evil response by Swiss authorities, give her "a tremendous sense of betrayal. We trusted these people, we opened the doors of our country and our institutions. They say they want to be our partners in dialogue. But none of it is true." She reports that some Swiss residents with Muslim backgrounds have thanked her for speaking up and have told her that organized Islam does not speak for them. She is grateful for their support, she says, but she "would prefer it if they did not keep so silent."

17 minutes ago, beecee said:

And yet when I ask you if   something installed in 1790 could not be grossly outdated in 2017, you answer smugly, "that's easy, no". Every decent country in the world has seen the need to change laws, constitutions, governmental procedures, etc as the march of time sees them as outdated. In other words if the cap fits, wear it.

As an aside when the first cars rolled off the assembly lines, did not they have to by law have someone walking in front of them waving a lantern?

I wasn't being smug. I was sincere that I can answer without equivocation as I've examined repeatedly and exhaustively my opinion on the matter, the quite specific question you asked. I should add that I am religiously Agnostic but believe the inalienable rights tenet is precisely the what makes the American Constitution the longest to survive.

Just now, iNow said:

Define “persuasive.” Essentially ALL evidence points to human activity being the primary driver of current climate trends. 

My understanding is that almost none of the putative evidence points to human activity. Persuasive evidence would be information adduced in support of the anthropegenic explanation such that I don't assert what I did in my first sentence of this post. No? Yes.

7 minutes ago, rangerx said:

Sheriff Joe Lombardo just mentioned in a news conference, the shooter had several cases of tannerite in his vehicle.
 

Go to mm:ss==02/15 at 30lbs of tannerite vs 79 Ford Bronco

10 minutes ago, beecee said:

No matter how much or how often you and the NRA distort the truth, in time I believe the decent Americans will see that change does eventuate. A shame that in the meantime, the NRA and its associates will be responsible for many more probable deaths that may have otherwise been avoided.

Glad you agree. Again many Americans will I believe see that change does take place. Not all are of the same stubborn arrogant macho frame of mind as those associated with the NRA.

Just to counter the furphy our macho gun lobbyists like to push re gun control having no or minimal effect.......

https://www.sciencealert.com/the-largest-dataset-we-have-shows-powerful-evidence-gun-control-works/page-2

extract:

I don't know about the NRA, but I know that I don't distort the truth, as it may exist. I am not a member of the NRA, never have been and I don't know anyone who is a member, just for the record.

The classical liberalism that one wouldn't hesitate to admit to supporting has, in America, been supplanted by a violent, irrational version of which "Antifa" is the most obscene example. I saw my first BLM tee-shirt, this year, which was worn by a young black woman and I was in our town's Starbucks. I didn't speak to her, nor did I go near her. I live in a small town not far up the Hudson River from New York City. The best account of the origin and putative cause of what is witnessed on college campi in America--perhaps in many Western nations' colleges--can be found in Allan Bloom's famous book, The Closing Of The American Mind, 1987.

On 12/17/2016 at 4:31 PM, Patti_the_Scientist said:

I think that global warming is just an opinion. Who here in the science comunity agrees?!?

If you mean anthropogenic global warming, then there are myriad tons of opinion in support of it and near to no persuasive evidence in support of it.

What is certain is that Earth has been through catastrophic cooling repeatedly and the consistent, significant warming which followed the most recent glacial period has been so beneficial that human progress has unprecedented, though there have been well-document iterations prior to the most recent.

Given that, which do you prefer, the warming I've just described or a return to huge glaciers on top of your heads?--some oscillation around some pleasant medium being an option akin to fantasy?

When an account of an event is recorded, then there is history. After that, there is the use and abuse of history. My favorite work of Friedrich Nietzsche has been the essay, The Use And Abuse Of History, translated by Adrianne Collins. (A citation or reference of a translated work is completed by giving it's translator; even the title can't be certain: "On the Use and Abuse of History for Life", " History in the service and disservice of life", " On the Advantage and Disadvantage of History for Life", "On the Uses and Disadvantages of History for Life". There may be others and, if you want a real shock to the system, read within and compare one translated work with another. You will then and only then understand the problems of German-to-English translation.)

According to this essay, historical treatments may come in three forms: the monumental, antiquarian and critical.

In short, with respect to monumental history, the subject is "the rare and classic"; for the antiquarian, it is "the traditional and venerable"; for the critical, it is that which "judges and condemns.

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

Computers and girlfriends don't read minds. I am sure each has provided investigators important insights but I wouldn't assume they knew anything for sure yet. 

I'll bet of my pinky fingers on it--my assumption being correct.

42 minutes ago, beecee said:

So you would kill to protect some bit of amendment written in 1790, after a bloody war for independence? You don't believe in the year 2017 that such a thing is now grossly outdated?

That might be the most easy to answer: No.

45 minutes ago, beecee said:

ll I can say as an outsider is  thank f%&$#@* Christ  I live 12,000 kms away

I am very, very happy that you live there too.

Sergio Mendes & Brasil '66, Stillness

Just now, CharonY said:

From everything known so far it rather looks like Sandy Hook, Columbine, maybe Charleston or the Denmark terror attack in 2011 (though the latter two actually had some political connotations).

Adam Lanza was obsessed with the Columbine shooting. I haven't heard or read anything yet about Paddock. There is a video that or two that show a man with a significant resemblance to Paddock, with a woman resembling Marilou Danley, the "girlfriend" who is being interrogated upon returning from the Philippines

Just now, beecee said:

The question I am prompted to ask the supporters of the current open slather for guns in the USA and their so called right to bear arms, is would they kill to protect this so called right. 

I would take up arms--I don't own any--if it were necessary to protect the Constitution-given right to bear arms. It is not a so-called right, is is precisely of the same type as the two enumerated the amendment that precedes it, the First Amendment.

2 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

There is an ongoing investigation. His motive is being investigated. I don't understand why you think authorities already know the motive and aren't releasing that information?

Simply for the reason that they possess the hard-drives of any of the computers he left behind and have interviewed his Phillipina "girlfriend."

To date, a definitive motive for S. Paddock's murder spree remains, presumably, known to the authorities. The extreme level of planning involved by the murders indicates that he did not "snap" suddenly and went on a rampage. If it is determined that he was "radicalized" either politically or religiously, then it falls into the same category as the mass-shooting of the US Republican Congressmen, June 14, 2017, the truck-massacre of Nice, France, Jul 14, 2016 and the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in USA, to name only three.

This thread is not about gun control. People are free to discuss that, but there is a thread, When is the time? dedicated to that ==>da thread.

11 hours ago, DrP said:

On a plus note...  (and back on topic) - he DID say that he might look at the gun laws, or at least have a discussion about them soon

Please see my post above.

This left intentionally blank. (I forgot about the one not permitted to be added to my ignore list--for some preposterous reason.)

14 minutes ago, Juno said:

Where are you getting this 6000 figure from?

I won't make any conclusions about the approximate 1/3 cases "dropped" from the 6000+, for obvious reasons.

From bbc.com, a source that some Americans find as inappropriately biased as CNN, as I do:

"Increases in the number of rapes being recorded may mean that victims feel more confident in reporting what happened to them; or decreases may mean that victims are losing confidence in the authorities to treat them sensitively."

Inspector of Constabulary Dru Sharpling said there may be a range of explanations for regional variations in recorded rapes but that questions over victims being disbelieved had to be raised.

Policing practice developer Helen Hopwood said the figures highlighted "inconsistencies between forces about the outcome of rape investigations".

30 minutes ago, scherado said:

UK is on verge of breakdown of civil society no matter whether they have no-go zones

There is no exact time associated with "on [the] verge" as it will be a function of the ability of the several resistance groups that are being fought against by those in authority and those not in authority who oppose them, all in Britain.

1 minute ago, DrP said:

6000+....  over how many decades is that figure?    How many comparative crimes in the USA over the same period?

 

Not decades if you do a simple search. I do believe the the start date is possibly 7 years ago. There are ZERO comparative crimes in USA to the best of my knowledge.

9 minutes ago, DrP said:

...

There have been some sex rings...  there are evil people everywhere - are you saying there are no gang rapes in the USA? ...

There is an entire scandal of the 6000+ victims. "some sex rings" is quite inadequate--I am being kind here. I am so very lucky to not be living in Britain. If my nephews and nieces are required to go to Europe and save the Continent again, then I won't and they won't be so lucky.

10 minutes ago, Juno said:

The fact that there have been crimes committed in two cities in the UK hardly indicates the country being on the verge of the breakdown of civil society. 

Please see my comment to "DrP" just above.

I don't know when the breakdown will occur, I am predicting that the trajectory is that direction and have no calendar entry marked with the predicted date: The trajectory--down the toilet--will proceed if there is no reversal, and I don't predict a reversal, hence I "wrote-off" Britain several years ago.