Future Regrets?

[Peregrinator]

No, I think law suits would have forced them to clean it up.

But the history of it tells us that the original polluters went out of business, if I recall and the land sold because the best SCIENCE at the time told them that it was safe. You keep viewing the past with perfect 20-20 hindsight, as do we pretty much all do, but you don't even thing about the advances in automobile technology that made cars, and car frames better and it was not done because of regulations, but because of market share.

And, in this morning's news, a little gift for A_J which goes to some of his earlier contentions:



Money does seem to be the root of all evil...

Competition is tough out there for the mother's milk of the governmental-educational complex.

No answer to my point about drugs? And your contention is that all that poison shit was dumped there because the company doing it was perfectly ethical? They didn't dump it there to save money?

Drugs without regulation. Your thoughts, please? Food without regulation. Water. Any answer?

You found one lab tech somewhere in the basement of some lab and thay means all scientists are lying for money. Yet you cite Stossel saying he tried but could only find a very occasional bad actor in corporate stuff. Could you at least make a nod at consistency?

If you think that cars would have gotten safer without regulation, you are ignoring the fact that they were unsafe before the regulations. The market you believe in is magic. The closest thing there is to an unregulated market now is the black market. And you, yourself, have pointed out the problem with it.

 

[Peregrinator]

Same thing with the chaotic system known as the earth. We know the bounds of our climate which includes ice ages. What we do not have is the computational power to do (and clearly the brainpower) to predict the future. Anyone who believes in that is adopting a faith-based political science. There are too many elements of the earth, sun and moon and the interactions are so complex that no model could be built based on today's technology to predict where that bullet will land, and that's a simpler, like the six hurricane models, model and we can't even solve that.

What you are left with is a group of people with an agenda a goal and a political science that produces nothing but fear and relies upon largely government grants for its survival. If they were doing something truly useful to man and his knowledge base, the private funding would be there betting upon profitable results. Since this will never produce anything profitable, then it has to rely on public largess and being a benign researcher of climate is a tough sell went it comes to grants, but being a prohet of doom and gloom who cannot be questioned because ot the degree and lofty position of expertise seems to pay off quite handsomely...

We do know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, along with a bunch of others. We also know that human activity releases tremendous amounts of them. We also have miltiple ways of measuring both those emissions and the warming of, and acceleration of that warming, the earth's climate. We know for certain what effects a warming climate has. None of this is disputable. You keep focusing on the mathematical and computer models to the exclusion of common sense. If you insist on punishing the bullet thing, what you're doing is claiming that because chaos math, a brick wall in front of the bullet might have no effect on the shot. It's patently absurd.

And you continue to broad brush several thousand scientists as money-grubbing liars. This is perhaps your most egregious error. You are ideologically bound to dismiss by way of a false ad hominem characterization a whole body of research and human effort.

 

[hsnh]

LUNATION gave excellent responses.

He knows his shit, yet has an uncanny ability to put the most interesting concepts in simple, humble terms.
He made me think and consider things in different ways than I used to.

It would be great if he or others carried on that conversation.

 

[Peregrinator]

LUNATION gave excellent responses.

He knows his shit, yet has an uncanny ability to put the most interesting concepts in simple, humble terms.
He made me think and consider things in different ways than I used to.

It would be great if he or others carried on that conversation.

...so carry on. Why go meta? Just join in.

 

[Phelia]

I regret wasting my time reading that exchange with AJ.

 

[Peregrinator]

I regret wasting my time reading that exchange with AJ.

I regret that you were in the wrong place that one time.

 

[Phelia]

I regret that you were in the wrong place that one time.

I've still never been to Maine! It's a little funny that places can be right or wrong depending on what time it is.

I always regret procrastinating, but I've come to rely on the pressure it affords me.

I'll get better about procrastinating. Someday....

 

[hsnh]

...so carry on. Why go meta? Just join in.

I might, actually in one or two days, when I'm in a better space for it.

As ridiculous as it might sound, his posts inspired me.
As in he made me think of so many things, like the myth of Sysiphus and so on, in different ways,

I would be keen to see him post again, and to follow his posts.
Alternatively, I put him on my list of pm"s but I doubt that he'd be interested in corresponding with me.

 

[Peregrinator]

I've still never been to Maine! It's a little funny that places can be right or wrong depending on what time it is.

I always regret procrastinating, but I've come to rely on the pressure it affords me.

I'll get better about procrastinating. Someday....

There's some joke to be made about Heisenberg in there somewhere.

Me, too. I'm a terrible procrastinator, always have been.

 

[Peregrinator]

I might, actually in one or two days, when I'm in a better space for it.

As ridiculous as it might sound, his posts inspired me.
As in he made me think of so many things, like the myth of Sysiphus and so on, in different ways,

I would be keen to see him post again, and to follow his posts.
Alternatively, I put him on my list of pm"s but I doubt that he'd be interested in corresponding with me.

No pressure, the thread will still be here. I'm glad you found some inspiration in it. That was sort of the point, originally. And I agree; I'd like to see him post more, too.

 

[Lunation]

Apologies! I think I conflated the conversation with you and the one with Eternal.

It does seem you're juggling quite a few topics in this thread.

Did you somehow get started on climate change above as well? Seems everything in the GB takes a political bent given enough time. Not that climate change *should* be political but, here we are.

 

[Lunation]

LUNATION gave excellent responses.

He knows his shit, yet has an uncanny ability to put the most interesting concepts in simple, humble terms.
He made me think and consider things in different ways than I used to.

It would be great if he or others carried on that conversation.

Oh, hello there.

That's a lovely compliment about my conversing abilities, so, thanks! Though the only problem with compliments about conversation is that they are poor generators of further conversation.

So, I guess I'll elaborate on the point I was making when our traveling host got me confused with someone discussing pharmacology: rather than aiming to lead a life your future self will not regret, it may be beneficial, or at least interesting, to try to live a life that will create a future self capable of accepting the past as it is. Or was. Being the past and all, past tense seems fitting.

Minor distinction.

 

[Noor]

Plymouth, NH in the late 80's.



Lol. There's always more phone sex.

I think the idea of future regrets is sort of like asking, "What do you wish was different in your life right now, and what can you do about it?"

After seeing old friends over the past two weeks I suppose I regret not being in a place where I can see more of them.
It has been very hard for me to meet my friends for coffee or a meal these last few years or other events that involve food or drink and unfortunately that is what people mainly do. I do go to non food events with others but they are not all that conductive to conversations.
I did have a successful house concert a few months back andi think I need to think of ways of have people over without food or drink or at least only safe for Me stuff.
Maybe a plein air painting party...

 

[MelissaBaby]

Oh, hello there.

That's a lovely compliment about my conversing abilities, so, thanks! Though the only problem with compliments about conversation is that they are poor generators of further conversation.

So, I guess I'll elaborate on the point I was making when our traveling host got me confused with someone discussing pharmacology: rather than aiming to lead a life your future self will not regret, it may be beneficial, or at least interesting, to try to live a life that will create a future self capable of accepting the past as it is. Or was. Being the past and all, past tense seems fitting.

Minor distinction.

"The past is never dead. It's not even past." - William Faulkner

I like what you've said, and ironically, I regret that I didn't think as you do earlier in my life.

I don't think people "change" in any fundamental way. They adjust, but that only means they give certain aspects of themselves higher priority than others. Some people are good at maintaining their chosen priorities, some are not, and some stumble through life never figuring out what those priorities are. The 12 step slogan "One Day At A Time" has become a cliche, but there is truth to it. I think (I hope) that the way to eliminate regrets later in life is to try to live each day in a manner that you have nothing to regret. The trick,of course,is to have the wisdom to know how.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

No answer to my point about drugs? And your contention is that all that poison shit was dumped there because the company doing it was perfectly ethical? They didn't dump it there to save money?

Drugs without regulation. Your thoughts, please? Food without regulation. Water. Any answer?

You found one lab tech somewhere in the basement of some lab and thay means all scientists are lying for money. Yet you cite Stossel saying he tried but could only find a very occasional bad actor in corporate stuff. Could you at least make a nod at consistency?

If you think that cars would have gotten safer without regulation, you are ignoring the fact that they were unsafe before the regulations. The market you believe in is magic. The closest thing there is to an unregulated market now is the black market. And you, yourself, have pointed out the problem with it.

I gave you the same answer that I got from you about fracking.

corporate <> academia

Not only that, but it wasn't a comprehensive search, just an example of what academia is, human beings guided by human nature, being engaged in science does not abrogate who and what we are, it does not make us 'superior' beings. More of that in a second...

You are engaging in post hoc ergo propter hoc with your focus on regulations. Most regulations chase technology like they chase accidents. The remaining regulations address problems that do not exist, but serve political cause.

Remember my story about sensei and six good fighters? That is what the Science community is and it has become bloated because of government money. The mediocrity begins early with the notion that a child's ego is more precious that its intellect, so children who don't learn are just passed on. This goes on all the way to High School and the diploma just becomes a participation award. In fact, it's gotten so bad that we see schools beginning to eliminate the Valedictorian and Salutatorian in order to ensure that everyone feels like the participated equally.

Then, having inculcated the student body into believing that education is not just the next step, but a right and flush with government money, the ill-prepared head off for college and remedial courses. The college, in competition for governmental educational money then lowers standards to ensure a larger market share and expands, creates new disciplines and does everything it can to retain their students. Soon the Bachelor's degree becomes another participation award.

And so it goes until we have more PhDs that ever competing for government grants willing to fudge the numbers and publish that which government rewards, for political gain. Soon science is dominated by those of lesser intellect but desiring everything the ego of you hated businessman desires, but placing more emphasis on fame and prestige than profits or market share.

And what happens to the real intellectual who bucks the trend and says, wait, what these other scientists are saying is wrong? Well ask Peter Duesburg who stood up to political science. Every effort possible was made to destroy his reputation and career, but he kept working on and produced other breakthroughs in his field to the point that SciAm had to write an editorial to tell its readers that they must pay attention to the paper he just wrote because of his brilliance. The few get drowned out the consensus of the many...

That's what a McDojo is. A place where people go and send their children to so that they can have the resume padder, black belt. That's what education has become, McEducation.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

We do know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, along with a bunch of others. We also know that human activity releases tremendous amounts of them. We also have miltiple ways of measuring both those emissions and the warming of, and acceleration of that warming, the earth's climate. We know for certain what effects a warming climate has. None of this is disputable. You keep focusing on the mathematical and computer models to the exclusion of common sense. If you insist on punishing the bullet thing, what you're doing is claiming that because chaos math, a brick wall in front of the bullet might have no effect on the shot. It's patently absurd.

And you continue to broad brush several thousand scientists as money-grubbing liars. This is perhaps your most egregious error. You are ideologically bound to dismiss by way of a false ad hominem characterization a whole body of research and human effort.

Yes we do know it is.

But when you look at the real numbers, it's not very significant and it is good for plants.

You broad brush business, so I demand the same latitude.

Also you have no clear understanding as to what Chaos Theory is.


I just saw this elsewhere:

https://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/accumulatedmap-1_shadow.png

The climatologists use the red glaciers to scream, Greenland is melting! (Forgetting that not too long ago historically, it had a smaller ice shelf and was colonized.) It's the polar bears all over again. But we can clearly see that outside of that tiny subset of Greenland, the majority of ice sheets are growing. I mean, isn't that what a reasonable person does? Look at all the facts?

That's not me dismissing by ad hominem , but not falling prey to the admonishment, "Who are you going to believe? Me? or your lying eyes?" It is my duty as a reasonable person to question, to reason, to think. Your hysteria just screams of religion. I am wary of all religions.

Your religion will not seem to answer a couple of simple questions, "What is the optimal temperature for the earth?" and "Why is colder better than warmer?" I find the rate of warming to be historically insignificant, I look at the ppm as see the CO2 increase as insignificant and I note that as technology advances so does or CO2 emissions go down. We're declining faster than Germany which did what I advise against, ordered its citizens to pay higher energy rates so that it could pursue "green" energy. Government favors political science over real Science.

Please keep in mind that vast "bod[ies] of research and human effort" in the past have often reached wrong conclusions that were erroneous. I also know by the antics of the True Believers had them floating such absurd theories that the ocean is hiding the heat...

lol

Why do they need these ancillary theories? Well, the warming/warning did not occur in the manner which they told us it would, immediate and dramatic. They used models to prove this. The models were wrong, but they were rewarded handsomely.

I too have a cause that I really believe in, The FairTax.org. But I'm not so vested in it that I run around proclaiming that the whole economic order will crash and burn if we don't adopt it and it doesn't drive me to impugn people who scoff at the viability of the idea.

I do recommend that anyone whom believes in something passionately read The True Believer and The Ordeal of Change by Eric Hoffer, blue-collar philosopher. The former explores what constitutes mass movements without judgement, the church gets the same treatment as the Nazis. The latter explores the relationship between man and the intellectual class (among things, it is a collection of essays).





https://realclimatescience.com/2017/07/latest-from-the-greenland-meltdown/

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

The fruits of success are often bitter...

Progress and the demand to always be improving creates perpetual discontent because the present and the status quo are never good enough. Perfectionism and obsessive control are the unintended consequences as is the disconnect between contentment and a culture where nothing is ever good enough. Pleasure, entertainment, leisure, and recreation add to progressive mania that is peripatetic America and have become its primary values.

The goal of making money and maximizing income for liberals is no longer about economic security but about overcoming boredom and the fear of boredom, fear of introspection, and at the deepest level, fear of death. And for financially secure liberals, nothing is ever good enough for them. Never enough money, never enough pleasure and entertainment, and never enough moralizing from on high how others should act and live. Many liberals are so unself-reflective they actually think that most of the world actually agrees with them. This is what happens when all of your basic needs have been met and the most elemental contingencies in life are taken for granted.

They have the luxury of bitching about things like global warming and social justice, not to mention always promoting their narcissistic obsessions with image, health, and eating habits, when they are totally blind to the reality of how the vast majority of Americans live. It explains almost entirely the reason for Trump's election -- that the vast majority of the middle and working classes don't care about social justice and identity politics. They are in survival mode...,

Tim Jones

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/07/the_era_of_our_discontent_.html#ixzz4m3MKKOzq



We need to make sure our children are wearing two helmets when they get on their bike and ride, unless you want children to DIE!!!

 

[raindancer]

I regret almost everything since 2002. What does one do with that?! Therapy?!

 

[Radiohead]

I regret almost everything since 2002. What does one do with that?! Therapy?!

Yeah, in 02... I missed you

 

[raindancer]

True, Mopey, true!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

...

As California’s population approaches 40 million people, its level of representation falls to pitiful levels. The number of legislators has remained at 120 since 1862, when the state’s population was about 420,000. In New Hampshire, the average number of people represented by each member of its lower house is under 4,000. In California, it is nearly 500,000, thus making each vote “insignificant unless you are wealthy,” according to the complaint.

As a result, residents in rural counties sit back helplessly as, say, environmental groups impose industry-killing regulations on the timber, fishing, and agricultural industries that are the main sources of rural employment. U.S. Rep. Doug LaMalfa, “who lives on a farm, says California’s urban denizens think of the rural areas as their ‘park,’ and deplores what he describes as trophy legislation to protect animal species,” the Times reported.

https://spectator.org/hard-pressed-rural-californians-try-civil-rights-approach/

 

[Lunation]

"The past is never dead. It's not even past." - William Faulkner

I like what you've said, and ironically, I regret that I didn't think as you do earlier in my life.

I don't think people "change" in any fundamental way. They adjust, but that only means they give certain aspects of themselves higher priority than others. Some people are good at maintaining their chosen priorities, some are not, and some stumble through life never figuring out what those priorities are. The 12 step slogan "One Day At A Time" has become a cliche, but there is truth to it. I think (I hope) that the way to eliminate regrets later in life is to try to live each day in a manner that you have nothing to regret. The trick,of course,is to have the wisdom to know how.

Focusing on different aspects of yourself is a good way of putting it. Differently priorities. Slightly different mindsets. But on the whole I agree that people largely don't change.

Recently my priorities have been shifting a bit. Letting my guard down. Admitting that perhaps certain norms and customs and rules that most everyone else follows and I have snubbed my whole life may hold some value.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf


I would say that page two and page 30 are the money pages.

We have PhDs, we have peer review and we have a conclusion of, if not outright fraud, then at the vey least fraudulent methodology with a bias...

 

[Noor]

Plymouth, NH in the late 80's.



Lol. There's always more phone sex.

I think the idea of future regrets is sort of like asking, "What do you wish was different in your life right now, and what can you do about it?"

Holderness?