Greetings From Idiot America

[OperaTenor]

*ig, I'm citing you for PWI - Posting While Intoxicated.

[Shapley]

OT,

No, I don't believe either of them is an intellectual. However, the author uses his college credentials as the basis for placing himself apart from
"Idiot America", so college grades figure into the equation, by his argument. Using that equation, Bush is the superior intellect of the two. (And he may well be, despite the hype, Kerry isn't the sharpest tool in the toolbox, as his mishandled campaign shows.)

V/R
Shapley

[barfle]

The author also argues that, while being an M.I.T. graduate 'means something' in Africa but not in Iowa, that Africans are somehow better that Iowans at recognizing accomplishment. The truth is that being an M.I.T. graduate means something in Iowa to a prosepective employer, where it counts, but it doesn't mean as much to the man on the street. Nor should it. I was in the Navy in with graduates from M.I.T. and U.C.L.A. and the Naval Acadamy. Some were credits to those institutions, some were not. Being an M.I.T. graduate doesn't mean you'll know about the state of world, how to grow corn, or which health-care plan is best for a family of four. It means you are better educated in your particular field of study. It doesn't even mean you'll be able to apply that knowledge in the field, but it will, and should, give you a leg-up on the competition when applying for a job that'll give you a chance to prove yourself.

A very wise but not particularly educated man I once knew said he learned most of what he knew from M.I.T. Except he said the letters stood for "Mistakes I've Tried."

I have a college degree, and I worked pretty hard getting it. It is in Electrical Engineering, so it does not say that I am knowledgeable in biophysics, political science, the faith of Shinto, how to make peace in the middle east, or cold fusion. It does say that I have received a reasonable education in the named field, and it also says I have received a smattering of exposure to several other fields, and have acquired the ability to study and understand fields in which I may desire to do so.. I don't expect someone to see my degree and based on that say "Gollllleeeee," unless I am talking about the state of electronics in 1979.

There are many things I know, far more things I believe but do not know, and even more things I am totally ignorant about. That does not make me special, but every now and then the realization of those facts seems quite unusual.

[Shapley]

Barfle,

I take it that's your way of saying you agree with me.

Probably the most brilliant man I ever knew was an engineer. I don't know that I ever heard where he got his degree, but for some reason I always thought he received it at the Rolla School of Mines in Missouri (probably because, as a young man, I thought all engineers got their degrees from the Rolla School of Mines in Missouri). To look at him he wasn't much, he was disorganized and rather slovenly. His car was filthy and usually filled with books and papers. He read all the time, it seemed. He wasn't very talkative, and seemed to have difficulty communicating with people. I think he chose his field because it afforded him minimal contact with people. His office and everything around him were disorganized, but he could rattle off facts and figures with ease.

One of the Naval officers on the Carl Vinson was also a brilliant man. Everything about him was kept in its proper place. His uniform was kept in good order. If all Hell broke loose, he was the one you wanted to be on duty, because he had a cool confidence that matched his knowledge.

If someone had to ask me which of the two was the more brilliant, I would choose the engineer over the Naval officer, but it would be a difficult call. They were both experts in their fields, but there would really be no way to compare the two. I'm sure if you asked the engineer questions about the operation of a shipbaord nuclear power plant, he would have some general knowledge of the theory and no practical background. Ask the Naval officer the same questions about Industrial Plant design, and he would be in a similar position. Ultimately, the question comes down to whether or not a person is competent in their particular field of work.

Are politics and economics that different? Can one be a brilliant Marxist while another is a brilliant Capitalist?

Benjamin Franklin once said: "An educated idiot writes his nonsense in better language, but it's still nonsense.". The Marxist thinks this is written about Capitalists. The Capitalist thinks this is written about Marxists. Could they both be wrong? Could they both be right?

V/R
Shapley

Sorry, it's a bit of a rambling post, but I'm in a bit of a rambling mood. Besides, I haven't had my coffee yet.

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

OT, you don't want to be an intellectual. I've noticed that the people who describe themselves as "intellectual" or "intelligentsia" or "cultured" also tend to hurt themselves with screwdrivers, can't replace the car's fuel filter, and are clueless faced with a malfunctioning bifold door.

They also often have defective sense of humor.

[OperaTenor]

They also often have defective sense of humor.

Are you trying to say I am an intellectual?!

[BigJon@Work]

"We've been attacked," he says, "by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture."

http://www.thefutureismedium.com/archives/00000112.html

Ah! that good, old lefty paternalism. "You believe in something transcendent? How quaint!"

The whole time I'm reading it I'm thinking it is also describing the high priests of the faith-based religion of human inducement of catastrophic global warming. Science has its religions too. The hockey stick is busted and the high priests are looking more and more like they formed a cult.

I'll take my intelligence wherever I can get it. Dirt farmer or MIT grad. If it's good and it works, I will borrow it and move on.

[barfle]

Shap, we probably agree on far more than we disagree on, but that doesn't make interesting conversations, does it?

I've met people from several different careers, and I've been able to admire even a few people in marketing. Especially since my own foray into entrepreneurship resulted in a product that did everything it was supposed to do except sell at a profit. I've met soldiers who I admired for being good soldiers, although most of the career soldiers I met were just lifers.

There are many jobs to be done in a society like ours, and I have no qualm about praising those who excel at jobs I wouldn't want to do.

When it comes to differences in political theory, I can even understand how some would prefer a directed economy over a free one. I'm not on that list, but I am sympathetic to those who desire security over opportunity. Of course, the one directing the economy needs to be competent, but that's another discussion.

I believe that there are circumstances which have one right answer and all the rest are wrong answers, but I also believe there are circumstances where there are several acceptable answers, and which one is best depends on the individual doing the selecting. To start with trivial examples, what is the cube root of eight, and what color should a house be?

[OperaTenor]

The whole time I'm reading it I'm thinking it is also describing the high priests of the faith-based religion of human inducement of catastrophic global warming.

Say that after you've seen An Inconvenient Truth.

[barfle]

Science has its religions too. The hockey stick is busted and the high priests are looking more and more like they formed a cult.

I'll take my intelligence wherever I can get it. Dirt farmer or MIT grad. If it's good and it works, I will borrow it and move on.

There is evidence of human caused global warming. That does not mean that global warming is human caused. I feel it's probably a natural cycle that has some influence by human activity. We have, after all, caused changes in the earth in the past. But, as I noted above, this is not my specialty, although I am educated in the sciences and have the ability to understand and interpret many scientific hypotheses.

And I'm far more impressed by wisdom than I am by intelligence.

[bignaf]

The whole time I'm reading it I'm thinking it is also describing the high priests of the faith-based religion of human inducement of catastrophic global warming.

Say that after you've seen An Inconvenient Truth.

on the contrary, the movie tends and is designed to produce emotions that will cloud a persons judgment.

[barfle]

Say that after you've seen An Inconvenient Truth.

Propaganda under the label "truth" is still propaganda, I'm afraid. From what I've heard, the movie is a more skillful application of propaganda than those by Michael Moore, for example, but that just makes it a bit more sinister, IMNSHO.

[OperaTenor]

SO, when I go see it, and come back and tell you all it lays it out like it really is, you'll all just conclude I've been properly propagandized.

[barfle]

SO, when I go see it, and come back and tell you all it lays it out like it really is, you'll all just conclude I've been properly propagandized.

We've ALL been properly propagandized. We just never know where or when.

[BigJon@Work]

The whole time I'm reading it I'm thinking it is also describing the high priests of the faith-based religion of human inducement of catastrophic global warming.

Say that after you've seen An Inconvenient Truth.

Why would I bother seeing it? Most of the "science" used in it has been thoroughly debunked by actual climate scientists. Al Gore worships at the church of human-caused global warming catastrophe and has allowed the cultist priests to lead him down a primrose path were the faithful dare not question.

Go read up on the shattered hockey stick. Then get back to me with the science.

[Shapley]

OT,

RE:

SO, when I go see it, and come back and tell you all it lays it out like it really is, you'll all just conclude I've been properly propagandized.

That is, after all, the purpose of propoganda.

The first thing that you have to realize is that all unintended consequences are not necessarily a negative. Even if global warming is occuring, and even if human's are causing it, that does not necessarily equate to it being a bad thing. Al Gore works from the assumption that all of man's impact on the environment is bad, and builds on that premise. Then he uses flawed science to back it up.

I addressed this, somewhat facetiously, over in the Healthy economy equals quiet bulletin board thread. The effects of global warming, whether natural or man-made, have as good a chance of being beneficial as they do of being harmful. In addition, measures taken to alter the course of such events have the same probability of unintended consequences.

V/R
Shapley

[BigJon@Work]

Not only that, but it diverts attention and money from real, scientifically proven pollution problems and other world problems that can be solved by more money in the right places. 'member this thread? http://www.beethoven.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=81497&#81497

[OperaTenor]

Go read up on the shattered hockey stick. Then get back to me with the science.

You forget I do read.

There is no "shattered hockey stick. Your "broken hockey stick" meme is the hue and cry of right wing politicians. This is the NAS report on Mann's findings the nutbobs are citing: http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/Surface_Temps_final.pdf. They obviously haven't read it, either.

Have you read it? I'll save you a little time, because I know how busy work gets for you when you're confronted with factual information and research that doesn't fit your worldview: The NAS backs up Mann's findings. They issue minor qualifications about the risks associated with inferring temperatures of 1,000 years ago, but otherwise concur that the warming we've expreinced in the last half of the twentieth centruy is unprecedented.

You're living proof of this article.

[Shapley]

OT,

Perhaps you are, after all, and intellectual. You're exhibiting the elitism that says that you, alone are immune to the effects of propoganda while everyone else in "Idiot America" falls prey to it.

Look at the graph you've posted. With the exception of the instrumental record, which requires considerable interpolation due to the ever-increasing number and accuracy of the instruments, the data appears to be repeating a cycle last achieved approximately 1,000 years ago. Those that show the highest levels do not provide data for 1,000 years ago, as they have no database from which to draw. Thus, they are not 'unprecedented', they simply have not been seen in 1,000 years (well before the invention of CFC's and the motorcar.

As I have already pointed out, fossils of tropical plants have been discovered in Antarctica, indicating that such temperatures as we are seeing are hardly 'unprecedented'. The Earth has been warmer, and will be again, most likely.

V/R
Shapley

[Shapley]

OT,

From your cited reference:

Based on the analyses presented in the original papers by Mann et al. and this newer supporting evidence, the committee finds it plausible that the Northern Hemisphere was warmer during the last few decades of the 20th century than during any comparable period over the preceding millennium. The substantial uncertainties currently present in the quantitative assessment of large-scale surface temperature changes prior to about A.D. 1600 lower our confidence in this conclusion compared to the high level of confidence we place in the Little Ice Age cooling and 20th century warming. Even less confidence can be placed in the original conclusions by Mann et al. (1999) that 'the 1990s are likely the warmest decade, and 1998 the warmest year, in at least a millenium' because the uncertainties inherent in temperature reconstructions for individual years and decades are larger than those for longer time periods, and because not all of the available proxies record temperature information on such short timescales.

That is a bit more than 'minor qualifications about the risks associated with inferring temperatures of 1,000 years ago'.

Also, look at the time when the warming began - Perhaps if George Washington or perhaps Abraham Lincoln had signed the Kyoto Protocol, it would have been in time to make a difference. It would seem to be a bit late for this or any of the previous administrations to have made a difference.

V/R
Shapley