syops

19 ms·

121.
by syops 5y ago
If you read my posts you’ll see that I addressed gravity, weather events and policy. The claim I make is that it is not an argumentative fallacy to appeal to the advice and knowledge of a large majority of experts in their area of expertise
122.
by syops 5y ago
The fallacy to which you alluded is actually the fallacy of the false appeal to authority. It is not an argumentative fallacy to appeal to the knowledge of experts in their area of expertise. A large majority of everything you believe to
123.
by syops 5y ago
It’s sort of a survivorship bias. I say sort of since generally speaking new evidence or contrary evidence without explanation has a history of being convincing in science. We won’t have perfect knowledge but one can make decisions based
124.
by syops 5y ago
I have no idea. I have no expertise on any of these issues.
125.
by syops 5y ago
This is the crux of the free rider problem. Consider this: my own hypocrisy has nothing to do with whether or not my statements on a particular topic are correct.
126.
by syops 5y ago
There are lots of examples of where science has gotten it wrong. So what do we do, philosophically, with this fact? It is possible that the 97+% of climate scientists are wrong in their beliefs. Let us ponder this possibility and assign
127.
by syops 5y ago
Why does that come to mind? The explanation provided does not explain everything even within the confines of climate science. When massive amounts of energy are added to a dynamical system there will be chaos before a new equilibrium is o
128.
by syops 5y ago
I’m curious why you ask this question. Does the answer matter or in some way lead to a broader point? If so what is that point? Assume it’s the worst possible energy source as far as you are concerned. Then what is your response?
129.
by syops 5y ago
From the first link it appears the effect is based on how the liquid flow of the core affects the orbit of the planet. The energy of the core does not play the same role on climate change as the energy that we’ve input into the system. I d
130.
by syops 5y ago
What does the energy of the Earth’s core have to do with climate? Outside of the effects of volcanoes I can’t think of anything.
131.
by syops 5y ago
Climate change is what right wing pundits started saying in the 90s instead of saying global warming. It was an attempt to obfuscate things. Words and phrasing of things change over time. It’s not the words used that matter; it’s the data
132.
by syops 5y ago
That’s looking a at max and minima. Look at max monthly or yearly temperatures and you’ll see the trend that was mentioned. By looking at monthly and yearly temperature trends you are less likely to be swayed by one off outlier events.
133.
by syops 5y ago
I’m not a climate scientist and a few degree increase used to seem like a small thing to me. Then I realized that increasing the global temperature average by a few degrees means putting in a massive amount of more energy into the system a
134.
by syops 5y ago
I truly don't understand what your point is. If, in your parlance, we have been rolling 3 dice all along then this means our previous 1000 years of climate data is truly extraordinary since this is the first time seeing a number greate
135.
by syops 5y ago
This is only true if the set of possible outcomes has remained static and if the probabilities of each outcome has remained static. With climate change the probabilities have shifted and the possible outcomes may have shifted too.
136.
by syops 5y ago
It seems to me that a website in English that has 50% users coming from the U.S. qualifies for the 'if' part of my statement. I think it's understandable for there to be a U.S. centric viewpoint on this site. Not that this
137.
by syops 5y ago
If a large enough percentage of users of a site are from a given country then isn’t it natural that those users will unconsciously make a corresponding assumption in their posts. This is especially so since for most Americans talk about ne
138.
by syops 5y ago
Thank you for the clarification. I understand your point now. I teach math at a community college an I'm absolutely convinced not everyone can understand math. I'm not a great teacher and I think I'm not a terrible teacher.
139.
by syops 5y ago
The person you responded to didn't make any claims about bad teachers or good teachers. The claim is that not everyone can understand computer science. As an extreme example do you think a person who is mentally disabled can understa
140.
by syops 5y ago
There are people who deny the effects of climate change and/or deny that it is occurring. Melting ice and desert plants not being able to survive in the desert are indications that change is happening and such indications can't b
141.
by syops 5y ago
Do you have evidence for this? My impression is the opposite but I have no evidence that I'm right or wrong. It's just an impression that I have.
142.
by syops 5y ago
You've changed things a bit now. The phrase in question is: eating food without causing pain The OP doesn't say this is what should be done. OP says that we should respect our food and talks about the living conditions of ani
143.
by syops 5y ago
It would have been a reasonable response had OP mentioned anything about eating food without causing pain. As it is the response makes no sense because it addresses a point not raised by OP.
144.
by syops 5y ago
The person you responded to didn’t say anything about eating food without causing pain . Your first two paragraphs aren’t an appropriate response.
145.
by syops 5y ago
High passing rate and minimal number of student complaints. No one in administration cares if the high passing rate is because standards were lowered. All they care about is that more than x% pass.
146.
by syops 5y ago
Want to actually teach kids things they need to learn to succeed? This is the wrong job for you. I teach at a community college and for years I've told newcomers to profession that one thing this job is not about is teaching.
147.
by syops 5y ago
If you read "Wages of Destruction" you'll see a greater number of references. I don't dispute the fact that we did create and distribute a lot of supplies. I claim that those supplies didn't win the war but rather
148.
by syops 5y ago
I recommend reading "Wages of Destruction". Historiography doesn't rely on just one person making a claim. That's just one small quote. The German war plans indicated that they simply didn't have the ability to su
149.
by syops 5y ago
I'm arguing against your assertion that the belief that America had little to do with the victory in Europe is bonkers level delusional. We did supply the Soviets with food and trucks but Soviet industrial output was greater than Germ
150.
by syops 5y ago
The war in Europe was won with Soviet blood. The failure of the Germans to take Moscow in 1941 effectively ended any chance of a German victory. While the U.S. made major financial and material contributions it's clear the Soviets we

More ›