Search is on for 'golden spike' signaling start of Anthropocene

August 23, 2016 by Bob Yirka, Phys.org report

A composite image of the Western hemisphere of the Earth. Credit: NASA
(Phys.org)—A working group of planetary scientists is set to formally address the 35th International Geological Congress this month on the issue of whether to declare that the Earth has entered a new geological epoch—the Anthropocene. If an agreement is reached that will likely set off a search for a "golden spike" to serve as the official start date. If all goes according to plan, there could be a formal declaration by the International Union of Geological Sciences as soon as two years from now.

Earth scientists have been arguing for several years that a variety of human activities have altered the planet to such an extent that we have entered a new epoch—one that likely started sometime in the mid-20th century. They point to the rise in that has occurred during a period when the planet's natural cycle would have given us cooler temperatures, the huge number of extinctions of plants and animals and the massive amounts of and pesticide components that have made their way to the oceans of the world. There is also so much plastic now that reminders of it will remain in rock formations for thousands if not millions of years—and there are also radioactive particles in soil across the globe from the nuclear testing that was conducted in the 1950s. The name for the new epoch has been credited to Paul Crutzen, who used the term a decade and a half ago to describe the scale of human changes to our planet—"anthropo" for "man" and "cene" for "new."

Declaring the planet to be in a new epoch would put an end to the Holocene, an epoch that began with the ending of the last major ice age approximately 10,000 years ago.

Clive Hamilton of Charles Sturt University has published a column piece in the journal Nature outlining the issues to be discussed at the meeting, one of which will focus on the search for a "golden spike." The scientific community will need to find and agree on a tipping point before an official declaration can be made—some have suggested a date to signify the start of the industrial revolution, others have noted that the date of the first atomic test might be more appropriate.

Explore further: New group seeks to timeline the Anthropocene—when humans became the dominant force on Earth

Related Stories

The Anthropocene: Hard evidence for a human-driven Earth

January 7, 2016

The evidence for a new geological epoch which marks the impact of human activity on the Earth is now overwhelming according to a recent paper by an international group of geoscientists. The Anthropocene, which is argued to ...

The age of Aquarius? Nope, it's the Anthropocene epoch

April 14, 2010

In just two centuries, humans have wrought such vast and unprecedented changes to our world that we actually might be ushering in a new geological time period that could alter the planet for millions of years, according to ...

The Dawn of a New Epoch?

March 26, 2010

(PhysOrg.com) -- Geologists from the University of Leicester are among four scientists- including a Nobel prize-winner - who suggest that the Earth has entered a new age of geological time.

Recommended for you

After a reset, Сuriosity is operating normally

February 23, 2019

NASA's Curiosity rover is busy making new discoveries on Mars. The rover has been climbing Mount Sharp since 2014 and recently reached a clay region that may offer new clues about the ancient Martian environment's potential ...

Study: With Twitter, race of the messenger matters

February 23, 2019

When NFL player Colin Kaepernick took a knee during the national anthem to protest police brutality and racial injustice, the ensuing debate took traditional and social media by storm. University of Kansas researchers have ...

Solving the jet/cocoon riddle of a gravitational wave event

February 22, 2019

An international research team including astronomers from the Max Planck Institute for Radio Astronomy in Bonn, Germany, has combined radio telescopes from five continents to prove the existence of a narrow stream of material, ...

116 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Shootist
1.9 / 5 (19) Aug 23, 2016
Anthropocene?

You don't call the Jurassic, Triassic, Cretaceous, the Saurocene. Man's ego is boundless.
shavera
5 / 5 (18) Aug 23, 2016
Well the dinosaurs didn't shape their environment to the extent we have. It's not just a matter of 'ego' but that there are significant geological changes caused by a single species.

Even leaving aside climate change and the geological effects it will have, we've mined and quarried tons of materials; we've made artificial 'stone' like bricks and concrete; we've dammed rivers and dug canals, changing sediment deposits; we've dramatically changed the radioisotope signature of surface materials; and so on.

If one imagined some distant future intelligent species' geologists looking back into the rock, they'd see a very distinct boundary around the present time. That's the justification for the 'anthropocene' (though of course the future species would give a different name to the same concept)
Benni
1.9 / 5 (26) Aug 23, 2016
This is so easy, the year of the Holy Hockey Stick, 1998.

The capitol city of every country in the world should create a shrine to house an image of their GOD like the Greeks did enshrining GODDESS Athena in the Acropolis. In the new shrines we would find a huge golden hockey stick with the number 1998 emblazoned along the blade of the stick where the worshippers could lay down their offerrings of envelopes filled with money for the purpose of funding more research into finding the remaining 80% of the Universe.
gkam
2.9 / 5 (14) Aug 23, 2016
Benni, this is not like doing silly equations at home, this is real, and it is happening now.
gkam
2.6 / 5 (11) Aug 23, 2016
I am sure when future anthropologists look through the leavings of this epoch, it will seem to be the filthy room of a teenager with little self-control.
MR166
2.4 / 5 (15) Aug 23, 2016
As the few shift through the post WWIII smoking ruins they will understand the horrors of a soulless corrupt society. When things like honesty and ethics no longer matter a little more CO2 is the least of our worries.
gkam
2.5 / 5 (17) Aug 23, 2016
No, we will be killed by those with special knowledge of the Ultimate Good.

It is only for the Ultimate Good that we can do all the nasty, terrible, hateful, and disgusting things to each other and feel righteous about it.

We have all seen the results of religious "ethics".
MR166
2.5 / 5 (15) Aug 23, 2016
"No, we will be killed by those with special knowledge of the Ultimate Good.

It is only for the Ultimate Good that we can do all the nasty, terrible, hateful, and disgusting things to each other and feel righteous about it."

GK you have just described the "The end justifies the means" ethics of the Progressive movement to a tee!!!
gkam
2.6 / 5 (15) Aug 23, 2016
Excuse me, but the bleeding-heart liberals were not the ones burning folk alive in the Inquisitions, or chopping off heads in the Middle East. Religion does that. Ignorance and hubris do that. Organized insanity does that.
MR166
2.5 / 5 (13) Aug 23, 2016
"Excuse me, but the bleeding-heart liberals were not the ones burning folk alive in the Inquisitions, or chopping off heads in the Middle East. Religion does that. Ignorance and hubris do that. Organized insanity does that."

Ah, so the 100 million or so that Stalin and Mao killed do not count eh? Run away governments kill powers of ten more than the occasional religious movement does. Oh yea, Hitler was considered to be savior and was totally supported by the Liberals.
ThomasQuinn
4.4 / 5 (20) Aug 23, 2016
Hitler was considered to be savior and was totally supported by the Liberals.


Absolutely not. This is pseudo-history. Hitler received support from the, mostly Prussian, military, which was royalist and reactionary, the Catholic Centre Party (Deutsche Zentrumspartei), which was VERY conservative, the large industrialists, also conservatives, and the middle classes,in majority conservative.

The Nazis openly ran on an ANTI-LIBERAL AND ANTI-SOCIALIST platform, as did all fascist movements at the time and since. Once in power, liberal and socialist groups were the first political opposition to be forced underground, and, being labeled Jewish, were their favorite enemies.

The Nazis seized power coming from the right, the communists did the same from the left. Raising the point of casualties at the hand of Stalin and Mao is legitimate, claiming that the Nazis and Hitler were left-wingers or popular with progressives is in complete contradiction to historical evidence.
MR166
1.6 / 5 (13) Aug 23, 2016
Part of the Progressive doctrine is that if history ever becomes a detriment to the cause, just rewrite it.

https://itsnobody...ovement/
MR166
1.6 / 5 (13) Aug 23, 2016
Just look at the New York Times articles that praised his accomplishments.
Estevan57
4.8 / 5 (17) Aug 23, 2016
Thank you ThomasQuinn for the reality break amidst the madness.
ThomasQuinn
4.2 / 5 (20) Aug 23, 2016
Part of the Progressive doctrine is that if history ever becomes a detriment to the cause, just rewrite it.

https://itsnobody...ovement/


This is a disgusting way to dismiss this. Documents written AT THE TIME, in many instances BY THE NAZIS THEMSELVES, the authenticity of which is beyond doubt, prove BEYOND QUESTION that the nazis were right-wing, enjoyed support predominantly from right-wing, conservative and reactionary groups.

You are falsifying history, a disgusting and immoral thing to do. The only conclusion I can draw is that you are so worried by the implications of the Nazis being somehow part of the right, which is clearly your side, that you are resorting to the most lunatic claims to attempt and drop them in the left's lap.

Not ONE respectable historian, let alone one with expertise on the subject, backs your claim that the Nazis were left-wingers. Provide sources or apologize.
ThomasQuinn
4.3 / 5 (16) Aug 23, 2016
Thank you ThomasQuinn for the reality break amidst the madness.


You're quite welcome. I'm a trained historian, and if there's one thing I can't stand it's pseudo-history. Nobody benefits from false tales passing for real history, in the end not even the vile people who try to pass them off.
MR166
1.3 / 5 (12) Aug 23, 2016
Well TQ how do you explain Nazi sympathizers like Soros spearheading and FUNDING the Progressive movement.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (11) Aug 23, 2016
@Thomas

Marx was a 'trained historian'. Is that the kind of 'trained historian' you are? Are you the kind who thinks that argument from authority works on a site like this?
The Nazis openly ran on an ANTI-LIBERAL AND ANTI-SOCIALIST
National socialists also chose red for their flags as it pissed the rot front off. It is impossible to distinguish among antagonists by using undefinable words.
antigoracle
1.4 / 5 (11) Aug 23, 2016
They point to the rise in global temperatures that has occurred during a period when the planet's natural cycle would have given us cooler temperatures, the huge number of extinctions of plants and animals

Just as that other infamous cult; the Church, was founded on blatant fabrications, the AGW Cult, desperate for church status, take their lead.
MR166
1 / 5 (9) Aug 23, 2016
If you look at the major terrorist threats per the US government, the religious right/white males are considered to be the number one terrorist concern. Yea right, they are the ones killing everyone. Damn those Christians and their registered guns!!!!

Meanwhile the leftest US government is destabilizing governments as fast as they can in the name of "human rights". Never mind the fact that the people who replace these leaders are even worse mass murderers.
MR166
1 / 5 (7) Aug 23, 2016
To add insult to injury, in the past 7 years the only thing more dangerous than being an enemy of the US is being a friend. Just look at what happened to the doctor that helped us capture Osama Bin Laden!
Captain Stumpy
4.5 / 5 (8) Aug 23, 2016
If you look at the major terrorist threats per the US government, the religious right/white males are considered to be the number one terrorist concern.
@mr
false claim - evidence?
and not a blog, but actual links to Gov't publications

you have top differentiate between domestic and international terrorism as this is how the US gov't specifically delineates it's classification of terrorism
The FBI divides the terrorist threat facing the United States into two broad categories—domestic and international.
https://archives....d-states

there are multiple agencies involved in dealing with both domestic and international terrorism, however there are several "central locations" you can visit for updates IRT - like https://www.dhs.g...y-system

and as noted above: even a "domestic" terrorist event can be instigated or planned by international terrorists
MR166
1.6 / 5 (7) Aug 23, 2016
"@mr
false claim - evidence?
and not a blog, but actual links to Gov't publications"

Capt if you do not remember that the "Domestic Right Wing" was considered by the FBI the #1 US threat just a few short years back you are not paying attention. Google it yourself.
Maggnus
4.3 / 5 (16) Aug 23, 2016
You don't call the Jurassic, Triassic, Cretaceous, the Saurocene. Man's ego is boundless.
This is such an odd statement, I can't help but wonder if he is kidding. (probably not, he is not that bright I think) The Jurassic, Triassic and Cretaceous are all part of the Mesozoic, which itself is part of the Phanerozoic. The Mesozoic is often referred to as the Age of Reptiles, of which it was thought that dinosaurs were a constituent when the name was first accepted for use. The Anthropocene would simply be a subsection of the Quarternary and uses similar criteria as is used to name the other subsections. It frankly seems fitting.

I find that Shootist often says such odd things. I think he is one of the ultra-conservative religious types. They hold that man cannot affect God's creation, and therefore global warming is untrue. It seems to explain a lot of what he posts.
MR166
1.8 / 5 (10) Aug 23, 2016
Maggnus it is far easier for man to pollute the environment to the point of affecting his survival than it is for him to affect the earth's climate. As as far as Co2 emissions go man is a mere pimple on the face of the earth.
BTW when the climate models stop diverging from the actual satellite temperatures let me know.
guptm
1.1 / 5 (12) Aug 23, 2016
Don't play with geological time scales. Do these people know how long so-called Anthropocene is going to last? An epoch cannot be named until it is finished. After another 100 years, these propagandists will propose another name. Holocene is good enough for what we are having now.

Also, stop the journal named 'Anthropocene'. Don't mislead people, they are already suffering from religion, don't give them another chance.
MR166
1.5 / 5 (8) Aug 23, 2016
Google "What does Nazi" stand for.

https://www.googl...ie=UTF-8
MR166
1.5 / 5 (8) Aug 23, 2016
Who funded Hitler? It looks like both the left and the right.

http://reformed-t...r_07.htm
Maggnus
4.2 / 5 (10) Aug 23, 2016
Don't play with geological time scales. Do these people know how long so-called Anthropocene is going to last? An epoch cannot be named until it is finished. After another 100 years, these propagandists will propose another name. Holocene is good enough for what we are having now.

Also, stop the journal named 'Anthropocene'. Don't mislead people, they are already suffering from religion, don't give them another chance.
Hey there gupie - you are aware why the epoch we are currently in was named the Holocene right? Do you disagree that mankind has had such an significant impact on the global environment that its fossil imprint will be identifiable millions of years from now?

That's all it is you know. An identifiable strata.
MR166
2.3 / 5 (6) Aug 23, 2016
Phys1 the correct answer is "The Bankers"! The very same bankers that are creating chaos today. They represent the left or the right at will, whatever makes them the most money. If you think that the left is not controlled by them you really need to get you head out of the sand.
MR166
2.1 / 5 (7) Aug 23, 2016
Left or Right there is no real difference now.

http://www.breitb...prisons/
Benni
1.5 / 5 (16) Aug 23, 2016
This is so easy, the year of the Holy Hockey Stick, 1998.

The capitol city of every country in the world should create a shrine to house an image of their GOD like the Greeks did enshrining GODDESS Athena in the Acropolis. In the new shrines we would find a huge golden hockey stick with the number 1998 emblazoned along the blade of the stick where the worshippers could lay down their offerrings of envelopes filled with money for the purpose of funding more research into finding the remaining 80% of the Universe.


Addendum: When the shrines are built there needs to be a space between the altar at which the worshipers genufleck & the Golden HHS Image. Within that space would be a funnel shaped hole at least a few feet in diameter & it would be painted black to look like the vortex of those artist's renderings of BHs. The worshipers would simply toss their offering envelopes into the pseudo-vortex & the money would disappear beyond view.........FOREVER.
leetennant
4.3 / 5 (12) Aug 23, 2016
Anthropocene?

You don't call the Jurassic, Triassic, Cretaceous, the Saurocene. Man's ego is boundless.


In breaking news, Shootist misses the point. The world is stunned.

I'm starting to wonder if commenting on this site requires some kind of mental health assistance.
Protoplasmix
4.6 / 5 (9) Aug 23, 2016
Addendum: When the shrines are built there needs to be a space between the altar at which the worshipers genufleck & the Golden HHS Image...
Benni, you're just about smart enough to make an entoproct jealous.
Azrael
3.9 / 5 (14) Aug 23, 2016
Addendum: When the shrines are built there needs to be a space between the altar at which the worshipers genufleck & the Golden HHS Image. Within that space would be a funnel shaped hole at least a few feet in diameter & it would be painted black to look like the vortex of those artist's renderings of BHs. The worshipers would ...


Is there anything relevant to the article, or anything relevant to -anything at all- in this incoherent ranting?

You were actually more tolerable when you were just gloating about being able to do differential equations to everyone who didn't have you on their ignore list yet.

Captain Stumpy
4.6 / 5 (10) Aug 23, 2016
Capt if you do not remember ... Google it yourself
@mr166
so what you're saying is:
you're too lazy to actually validate your claims with evidence because that's too hard?

or are you saying something else?
is it a conspiracy?
is this the same conspiracy that is apparently lying to the world about AGW in your eyes?
did benji tell you all about this one?
or is this another conspiracy with thousands of "man pimples" involved?

is the evidence there for anyone to see or do we need to look at it from your perspective?

do we need to believe in eu, some cult or anything else without evidence before we can "understand" where your comment comes from?

get back to me on that when you can actually give evidence for your claims, ok?

thanks
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (7) Aug 23, 2016
and as noted above: even a "domestic" terrorist event can be instigated or planned by international terrorists
Just curious, through the eyes of the (insanely persistent) war-on-terror-colored-glasses, which terrorist group was responsible for "radicalizing" Dylann Roof? The "internet" and his own self have been officially labeled the culprits. If rose-colored glasses are bad, so are the heil-homeland variety.
tblakely1357
1.7 / 5 (12) Aug 24, 2016
Excuse me, but the bleeding-heart liberals were not the ones burning folk alive in the Inquisitions, or chopping off heads in the Middle East. Religion does that. Ignorance and hubris do that. Organized insanity does that.


On the other hand, the arrogance of atheists that they could 'reshape' mankind in their idea of a utopia led to the mass death and misery of the 20th century. Atheists murdered more people in a far shorter time span in the 20th century than all the religious atrocities in history.

And when you factor in that most religious atrocities were actually 'secular' atrocities that just used religion as a justification, the evil of atheists in the 20th century is even more jaw dropping.
leetennant
5 / 5 (8) Aug 24, 2016
It's hands down the best No True Scotsman fallacy I've ever heard. And the most revealing
ThomasQuinn
4 / 5 (12) Aug 24, 2016
@Thomas

Marx was a 'trained historian'. Is that the kind of 'trained historian' you are? Are you the kind who thinks that argument from authority works on a site like this?
The Nazis openly ran on an ANTI-LIBERAL AND ANTI-SOCIALIST
National socialists also chose red for their flags as it pissed the rot front off. It is impossible to distinguish among antagonists by using undefinable words.


Marx wasn't a trained historian. He was a trained political economist and philosopher. His dabbling in history was an amateur undertaking. At the time that Marx went to university, there was no academic training in historiography. Thank you for playing and better luck next time.
Benni
1.4 / 5 (9) Aug 24, 2016
I'm starting to wonder if commenting on this site requires some kind of mental health assistance.
.....................so why then are you "commenting" if you really believe that?

By "commenting" you merely lump yourself into the same category as everyone else who are also "commenting". Or is it that you imagine your posts are above the level of "commenting", that you are somehow imbued with special wisdom that rises of the level of just "commenting"?

I guess you have yet to notice that most of the "commenting" in this thread has nothing to do with the topic. If you don't believe this, then go back & reread your own post, you didn't Comment on the topic, you simply went on a name calling rant about someone else & justify your rant because the poster about whom you are ranting obviously doesn't agree with your hardline position on something.

You worshippers of the Golden HHS Image need to learn to practice what you teach.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.1 / 5 (10) Aug 24, 2016

Marx wasn't a trained historian
Marx was indeed a trained historian.

"The philosopher, social scientist, historian and revolutionary, Karl Marx, is without a doubt the most influential socialist thinker to emerge in the 19th century."

-Are you attempting to change history here?

This is the internet and you can't get away with that. You CAN corroborate your claim with a valid ref if you wish.

Perhaps you are confused as to what 'trained' and 'historian' mean.
MR166
2.6 / 5 (5) Aug 24, 2016
Like frogs put into a pot of slowly heated water, most of the people here are oblivious to the cancers eating away at our nation. Whether it be the drug epidemic, drug gangs, lack of adequate jobs, dissolution of the family unit, children spending more waking time with the state educational system than parents or general lack of respect for the law, every metric shows a societal decline. I could add much more to the list but I really don't think that anyone cares.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.6 / 5 (11) Aug 24, 2016
Atheists murdered more people in a far shorter time span in the 20th century than all the religious atrocities in history
I'm getting a little sick of this idiot religionist lie. No matter how thoroughly it is disproven they will continue to repeat it.

Hitler was a Catholic. Nazi literature, speeches, and oaths are suffused with god references. 'Gott mit Uns' on their fucking belt buckles.

And communism was just another religion with refs to the afterlife, soul, spirit, chosen people, messiah, etc.

Jesus invented communism.
most religious atrocities were actually 'secular' atrocities that just used religion as a justification, the evil of atheists in the 20th century is even more jaw dropping
And of course this is exactly backwards. For instance Serbian militias were Christian militias, dutifully cleansing their own little holy land.

No institutions have done more to 'reshape' humankind for the worse than the 3 great military religions.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (8) Aug 24, 2016
Christian communism
https://en.wikipe...ommunism

Onward xian soldiers.

"According to chroniclers such as Eusebius of Caesarea and Lactantius, the battle marked the beginning of Constantine's conversion to Christianity. Eusebius of Caesarea recounts that Constantine and his soldiers had a vision sent by the Christian God. This was interpreted as a promise of victory if the sign of the Chi-Rho, the first two letters of Christ's name in Greek, was painted on the soldiers' shields."
Captain Stumpy
4.2 / 5 (10) Aug 24, 2016
which terrorist group was responsible for "radicalizing" ...
@Proto
there will always be someone who hates themselves (and society) enough to destroy it, or who is so focused upon their own power and influence they're willing to destroy for their goal ... and considering that most of them are delusional to the point of self aggrandizement like certain trolls here on PO, then there will always be "terrorists" among us waiting to destroy what has been created

of course, there are then those of the exact same type in society who decide to get their self-perceived "power and influence" by siding with the home team and become the "(insanely persistent) war-on-terror-colored-glasses" wearing idiots
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (12) Aug 24, 2016
keying "the domestic right wing" into a google search reveals more articles which support his point
@bshitthead
ah... the old "if it's published on the internet it must be true" argument!

lets see, if we google "fairy farts" we can also see the exact same result: more articles (and pictures too) supporting their existence than you can read in a week!
475K results
does that make them more "real" ??
https://www.googl...ry+farts

NO, it doesn't, because evidence and constraints making things more or less believable is important
https://en.wikipe...evidence

this is why anecdote is not as powerful as repeated experimentation with removed bias, or double blind medical experiments (as we discussed with your "magic magneto cancer-killer")

it is why accepting your unknown source "claims" from a random website is NOT the same thing as accepting validated scientific evidence or proof of "healing"

learn to science
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (12) Aug 24, 2016
@bschitt cont'd
there was no need for him to pick one and link it
actually, there is:
1- source: is it reputable or is it biased?

2- evidence: how is said source generating their information? where is there evidence coming from?

3- there is a big difference between evidence and opinion: opinion is subjective and it usually is formed regardless of evidence, whereas the evidence simply is and exists whether you like it or not
case in point: people still believe we didn't land on the moon, regardless of the physical evidence

so yes, there was a serious relevant "need" to see what he was referencing

and no, i don't consider an "article" evidence of anything other than opinion or proof of a quote as it, by definition, is opinion about a subject, not evidence *of* a subject
MR166
1.6 / 5 (7) Aug 24, 2016
Onions discounting everything that appears on the Breitbart website just illustrates how closed minded he really is. I would be willing to bet that he accepts everything that MediaMatters posts as beyond reproach.
antigoracle
1 / 5 (7) Aug 24, 2016
Search is on for 'golden spike' signaling start of Anthropocene

When the AGW Cult's lies finally hits the fan and the Chicken Littles dilute that cup of special Kool-Aid with their tears, humanity, left to deal with the trillions in debt from the AGW boondoggle, will be searching for the 'golden' turd that herald the rise of the cult.
antigoracle
1 / 5 (7) Aug 24, 2016
Onions discounting everything that appears on the Breitbart website just illustrates how closed minded he really is. I would be willing to bet that he accepts everything that MediaMatters posts as beyond reproach.

Why would you bother with the onionTard, when he shamelessly boasts about how he drove 1200 miles in 2 days? Imagine if the tard wasn't so worried about CO2.
antigoracle
1 / 5 (7) Aug 24, 2016
Since the onionTard, by virtue of his condition, cannot do the arithmetic. That's over half a ton of CO2 he spewed driving in just 2 days. Compare that to the annual average of 4.7 metric tons.
https://www.epa.g...040a.pdf
MR166
1 / 5 (7) Aug 24, 2016
I really don't understand the Progressive hatred of religion. After all, the whole US legal system and Constitution is based Judeo-Christian values. They must really hate the US.
antigoracle
1.5 / 5 (8) Aug 24, 2016
You claim that as far as C02 is concerned - man is a mere 'pimple on the earth.' I asked you what you meant - and presented two scientific graphs - that I think contradict that assertion. You go silent - and want to talk about how America is going down the crapper. Do you see the problem?

-- onionTard
Funny, scientific graphs, when all you needed was to boast about driving 1200 miles in 2 days, spewing over half a ton of CO2. Yet, guess what? The onionTard knows that America is going down the crapper.
Do you see the problem?
antigoracle
1.5 / 5 (8) Aug 24, 2016
I do hate religion.... I was raised a fundy Christian - and my potential for realizing an incredible life - was hobbled by the stupidity that I spent half my life growing up - in church - getting all excited about a non existent sky fairy. I want to be a part of sparing billions of others the anger and frustration of learning to late - that you have been duped.

Talk about being hobbled by the stupidity. Why don't you burden us with the anger and frustration of CO2. Tell us about how much you hate CO2 when you spewed over half a ton driving 1200 miles in 2 days?

https://www.youtu...QeUoPOi4
antigoracle
1.5 / 5 (8) Aug 24, 2016
OnionTard, hates CO2 and loves America so much, he only drove 1200 miles in 2 days, spewing over half a ton of CO2. Compare that to the annual average of 4.7 tons. It's a good thing onionTard thinks America is going down the crapper.
https://www.youtu...QeUoPOi4
Benni
1.8 / 5 (10) Aug 24, 2016
and my potential for realizing an incredible life - was hobbled by the stupidity that I spent half my life growing up - in church - getting all excited about a non existent sky fairy........
......and replaced it with a Hockey Stick.

leetennant
5 / 5 (9) Aug 24, 2016
I'm starting to wonder if commenting on this site requires some kind of mental health assistance.
.....................so why then are you "commenting" if you really believe that?



You misunderstand. The mental health assistance is for *me* after reading this tripe.

Like frogs put into a pot of slowly heated water, most of the people here are oblivious to the cancers eating away at our nation. Whether it be the drug epidemic, drug gangs, lack of adequate jobs, dissolution of the family unit, children spending more waking time with the state educational system than parents or general lack of respect for the law, every metric shows a societal decline. I could add much more to the list but I really don't think that anyone cares.


I mean ,seriously, WTF does this have to do with science? We're here to discuss knowledge acquired using a particular epistemological process. One which has proven to be superior - if a little reductive - than most others
leetennant
5 / 5 (10) Aug 24, 2016
If your response to a science article is to promote an epistemological process that privileges the unquestioning acceptance of what those in authority tell you is true, then you're quite literally missing the point. Completely.

I get that an epistemological process that privileges ongoing investigation into truths you are taught are self-evident is confronting. But that problem is for you to resolve on your knees on Sunday. Not by blathering nonsensically on the internet about how asking questions isn't necessary because a book written by nomadic goat herders 3000 years ago has everything you need to know.

Also, I couldn't give a shit about domestic US social issues. And they have nothing to do with the science of climate change, just like they have nothing to do with gravity or the existence of trees.

I feel like you think you're in Nightvale and are panicking because all these other people keep telling you that mountains exist.Well, they do, no matter what religion says.
Maggnus
4.5 / 5 (8) Aug 24, 2016
Marx wasn't a trained historian
Marx was indeed a trained historian.

"The philosopher, social scientist, historian and revolutionary, Karl Marx, is without a doubt the most influential socialist thinker to emerge in the 19th century."

-Are you attempting to change history here?
Otto you aught to read your own cite. Marx never studied history. That means he was not a "trained historian". Maybe try to little bit of googling laddie.
Perhaps you are confused as to what 'trained' and 'historian' mean.
I think the confusion, if any, rests in your camp.
antigoracle
1 / 5 (5) Aug 24, 2016
The bigger point for me - is that we SHOULD look to historians - if we want to understand history. It is just like the climate change debate. We should defer to climate scientists when trying to understand the climate.

And, we should look to onionTard to understand how to deal with climate change, after all, he only drove 1200 miles in 2 days and spewed over half a ton of CO2.
Captain Stumpy
4.1 / 5 (9) Aug 25, 2016
without knowing when he is accepting evidence that IS opinion
@bschitthead
by all means, please demonstrate where the evidence i've accepted from science is considered "opinion" by anyone other than yourself and the pseudoscience crank's who post here

to date, every argument you've made is about your "opinion" or "belief" on science & it's evidence whereas you have yet to provide a single piece of evidence equivalent to the science you denigrate that proves your own point

all you have are beliefs and false claims: http://www.auburn...ion.html

you consider mainstream science to be "wrong" or "opinion" regularly and regurgitate your delusions all over PO
... but you can't prove it with evidence

so where is it?
leetennant
5 / 5 (8) Aug 25, 2016
Oh, let him blather. If he really believes he has "the right" to some sort of murder-suicide pact with the entirety of the human race then he can go first.*

*Am not literally suggesting this as a course of action. Just highlighting the hubris of somebody who constantly talks about "natural selection" in the worst kind of social Darwinism/eugenics way without realising he's as vulnerable as everybody else. Wealth and white skin won't protect you from extreme weather events or a global lack of freshwater.
antigoracle
1.6 / 5 (7) Aug 25, 2016
Stupidity does that to people.

Well, the Retard of the Year should know, He speaketh from the empty space between his ears.

antigoracle
1 / 5 (5) Aug 25, 2016
@antithinking
That is not entirely fair:
your posts never have any content while mine always do.

Yep, the content that was in the now empty space between your ears, aka shite.
antigoracle
1.5 / 5 (8) Aug 25, 2016
@Ignoracle
Content threatens your blissful state of ignorance and makes you all grumpy.
I understand. On behalf of science, my apologies.

-- The Retard of the Year.
Look at what the article on this page is about and then look at everyone of your comments.... Hitler, Nazi's, Jews, Bush, Cheney...... Everyone, contains the substance that's been seeping out of the space between your ears. Of course being the Retard of the Year, you would class that as content.
antigoracle
1.6 / 5 (7) Aug 25, 2016
Well, it is all explained by, no surprises here, you missing most of the arguments in the discussion. No problem, continue vegetating!

Uh huh no surprises. It's not just this, but every article, you are never on topic.
No problem, continue retarding.
Captain Stumpy
4.1 / 5 (9) Aug 25, 2016
You accept the "evidence" for the existence of DM as a particle
@bschitthead
where did i ever say that?

i said i accept the observational evidence that there is something gravitational that we can't see (which is currently called Dark Matter), that said DM must have mass or affect mass gravitationally, and that it doesn't react with the EM spectrum, therefore suggests a particle

and i never said we had DM particles

and I don't refuse to accept evidence:
i do, however, refuse to accept your "claims" of evidence when you can't actually produce any, or because you don't like math, or because you don't like how something is worded, etc etc etc (i can continue if you like)

if you're gonna lie, you better substantiate your claims with actual evidence - not make sh*t up and say someone else said it because that is what you believe is being said in your delusional belief

at least i can prove every claim i make about you with evidence in your own words
Captain Stumpy
4.1 / 5 (9) Aug 25, 2016
@bschitthead cont'd
If the evidence was undeniable
since you're keeping this off topic for your argument from ad hominem and delusional Dunning-Kruger:

the observational evidence of DM *is* undeniable
You don't get that the only undeniable evidence of DM is a particle of it
1- the particle will define what the placeholder name is - never denied that one, but that doesn't mean there aren't ways to narrow the search for potential suspects of said placeholder name (be it particle or other)

2- just because you don't understand that the term "dark matter" is a placeholder name for observed phenomenon doesn't mean everyone else is as stupid as you are - so leave your transference at home and deal with those issues with your psychologist/psychiatrist
Your failure to comprehend this stems from a combination of trust in an establishment and a complete lack of understanding
epic fail: and absolutely no evidence for that claim
2Bcont'd
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Aug 25, 2016
@bschitthead last
for starters, yes, i DO trust scientists far more than i trust you... but that is because you've demonstrated a complete lack of ability to differentiate what constitutes reliable evidence versus your belief in something, much like any religious acolyte

for two: scientists conform to a known strict methodology that includes the removal of bias for the narrowing down of repeatable verifiable evidence and experiments, which is also something you have yet to be able to produce

this means your comments are, by definition, pseudoscience and opinion, not science, as there isn't any actual content or valid evidence

more to the point - you have a history of lying
(care to see that list of links starting with Martian soil?)

lastly:
you ASSume i don't understand because i challenge you for evidence and argue against your pseudoscience

if i didn't understand i wouldn't be able to argue with any evidence or references

ergo you're lying again
Benni
1.7 / 5 (11) Aug 25, 2016
i DO trust scientists far more than i trust you.
.......No, you only imagine that Astro-physicists are scientists with the equal capability of Nuclear Physicists/Engineers, in actuality they have a hard time finding someone to read their resumes because their education is so pathetically deficient in Nuclear Sciences.

ability to differentiate
...uh, uh, Stumpo, be careful here, "differentiate" is a branch of Calculus & you of all people posting here do not want to be wandering in and about the concepts mathematics.

scientists conform to a known strict methodology
....True, but what you dabble around in is all this cosmology stuff labeled Astro-physics. You see, in Nuclear Physics we know Infinite Wells of Gravity cannot exist on the surface of a finite stellar mass because we know attaining Infinite Density via Schwarzschild Black Hole Math is a charade. Same with zany Zwicky's DM Envelopes enshrouding Spiral Galaxies, or anywhere else for that matter.
Captain Stumpy
3.9 / 5 (11) Aug 25, 2016
because their education is so pathetically deficient in Nuclear Sciences
@benjiTROLL
1- this is called libel

2- if you could prove this you would be the hero of the eu cult, as well as every other pseudoscience idiocy you support
& you of all people posting here... about the concepts mathematics
considering i've proven you're not capable of doing basic math, let alone ODE's, PDE's or any other math, then your threat is meaningless: would you like to see those links proving you're a liar and incompetent again?

i have them saved...
stuff labeled Astro-physics
1- libel again? really?

2- i've proven astrophysicists MUST learn nuclear physics as well as plasma physics - it's a requirement for any astrophysics degree in any higher education program
see: http://web.mit.edu

or http://www.pppl.gov/

continuing to repeat a known lie makes you look like the idiot crackpot you are, which is why i typically ignore you
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.9 / 5 (7) Aug 25, 2016
Otto you aught to read your own cite. Marx never studied history. That means he was not a "trained historian". Maybe try to little bit of googling laddie
-So you didnt believe the ref I posted which I found with google? How about this one?

"However, in addition to his overtly philosophical early work, his later writings have many points of contact with contemporary philosophical debates, especially in the philosophy of history and the social sciences, and in moral and political philosophy. Historical materialism — Marx's theory of history..."

... So maybe he didnt study it he just made it up like most historians and philos perhaps?

What makes you think he wasnt a trained historian? How could he have sold his theory of history to all those liberal academes if he didnt have the proper credentials?

And what makes you think that his training was any better or worse than the poster who claimed he was a 'trained historian'?
Benni
1.4 / 5 (10) Aug 25, 2016
considering i've proven you're not capable of doing basic math, let alone ODE's, PDE's or any other math
.........little old retired man, the only thing you've ever proven since you've been posting here is that you can Copy & Paste & you even do that in an errant fashion.

Kooter
1.9 / 5 (9) Aug 26, 2016
Re; Thomas Quinn, Aug 23, 2016
" . . . The Nazis openly ran on an ANTI-LIBERAL AND ANTI-SOCIALIST platform, as did all fascist movements at the time and since. Once in power, liberal and socialist groups were the first political opposition to be forced underground, and, being labeled Jewish, were their favorite enemies . . ."
Sir, your comment is absolutely beyond inane. Your claim to be a historian is ludicrous on its face. The Nazi party was a portmanteau of National and Socialist.
Leftist academics such as yourself like to claim that that was just a ruse, but let me rebut;
(from WW2 Survivors Account);

". . . With innovative public works schemes such as the autobahn, Hitler put every german back to work." The KdF; strength through joy benefits program, wage controls, national health care and national child care. A national gun registration preceeded the actual confiscation. Hitler was a pro-choice vegetarian and clearly a socialist and your denial, sir, is pathetic.
Steelwolf
4.2 / 5 (5) Aug 26, 2016
You folks are all pretty slow, talking about stuff WAY off topic!

THIS Article shows us where to place said "Golden Spike" as far as the "Anthrocene", and even so we have to put all sorts of markers along the way. As far as the Global Warming portion of the recent anthropogenic changes are here:
http://phys.org/n...ars.html

And beyond that we only need to look at cities, dams and ancient bridges to see that humans have been changing the surface in many ways, for a long time, creating deserts from Forest (Any Lebanese Cypress left?) Heck, we even built mini mountains in the Pyramids and the Romans changed watershed patterns all over Europe.

It is not a matter of IF we changed our environment, it is How and When, and those we have answers to. Queen Elizabeth the First had to ban burning of coal in London and it's surrounding area due to the heavy choking soot. We are not the first to destroy our ecosystem, lets hope we are the first to stop it.
Bongstar420
1 / 5 (3) Aug 27, 2016
Its a nice marketing gimmick...but since when are geologic time periods named after the dominant fauna? Am I missing something, and they have named them all after which ever fauna was most prominent during the time periods?
leetennant
4.5 / 5 (8) Aug 27, 2016
Its a nice marketing gimmick...but since when are geologic time periods named after the dominant fauna? Am I missing something, and they have named them all after which ever fauna was most prominent during the time periods?


How many ways can people miss the point? It's called the Anthropocene because it's shaped by human activity. If it was just "because humans exist" then it would start 100,000 years ago.

We have changed the climate sufficiently to cause a new climatic epoch. Ergo that epoch is named after by what defines it - as most epochs are.

Duh.

Why do we always have to spell out the basics for these people?
Whydening Gyre
4.6 / 5 (5) Aug 28, 2016
And beyond that we only need to look at cities, dams and ancient bridges to see that humans have been changing the surface in many ways, for a long time, creating deserts from Forest (Any Lebanese Cypress left?) Heck, we even built mini mountains in the Pyramids and the Romans changed watershed patterns all over Europe.

It is not a matter of IF we changed our environment, it is How and When, and those we have answers to. Queen Elizabeth the First had to ban burning of coal in London and it's surrounding area due to the heavy choking soot. We are not the first to destroy our ecosystem, lets hope we are the first to stop it.

Weren't those events considered more a "local" phenomenon vs global, tho?
cjones1
2 / 5 (4) Aug 28, 2016
The ants or bacteria are problem jealous. CO2 levels were higher throughout most of their history than today.
People have been slaughtering each other since Cain for their beliefs. We all have our preferences and prejudices and differences are often suppressed by orthodoxy or campaigns.
On Hitler...a self named socialist party with orthodoxy that implemented eugenics in a selection process. They appropriated language and historical symbols like the swastika for their purposes. Hitler substituted Mein Kampf for Bibles on German altars or so I've read. He gave blue eyed, blonds a bad name. Buddha had blue eyes and the Bible time line to Eden appears to go back roughly to the time geneticists say blue eyes appeared...another sign of a covenant?
It worries me that Iranian Shiites, Sunni Militant, or North Korean orthodoxy may start a nuclear or biological Holocaust that wipe out historians. We have only just begun to understand geological & climatological timelines.
Steelwolf
5 / 5 (1) Aug 28, 2016
@WG, Yes, most of those things were local, but once you establish a route of trade to somewhere, then it expands the term 'local'. Now humans traverse most of the Earth, we heavily use the rivers and fertile valleys, even turn large expanses of grasslands into croplands just to feel our masses. The levels of pollution per human was very low, and nearly all biodegradable for most of our existence as an animal form, and yes (to someone else's question, the true anthropocene does go back a couple hundred K years) but it has only been since we have gone to large scale production with large amounts of toxic wastes and byproducts that can now be directly traced through ice and sediment cores. These will now ALWAYS be there, and will ALWAYS mark us as the cause of this present extinction event.

This is not even arguable.
antigoracle
2 / 5 (4) Aug 28, 2016
Just as that other infamous cult; the Church, has marked every date in the calendar with the beginning of its era, the AGW Cult of DOOM and GLOOM take their lead in a desperate attempt for church status.
BackBurner
1 / 5 (3) Aug 28, 2016
Hitler was considered to be savior and was totally supported by the Liberals.


Absolutely not. This is pseudo-history... The Nazis openly ran on an ANTI-LIBERAL AND ANTI-SOCIALIST platform.


Well, since we're discussing "pseudo-history", I point out that the moniker "NAZI" is an anglicization of the name of the party itself, which in English is the National Democratic Socialist Workers Party.

See that word towards the end? "Socialist"? The NAZIs were socialists. The didn't like Communists. You got confused. Fixed it for ya!
BackBurner
1 / 5 (3) Aug 28, 2016
Stumpy declares:
if you're gonna lie, you better substantiate your claims with actual evidence - not make sh*t up


In the context of a discussion on Dark Matter this has to be the most internally inconsistent declaration made to date.

There is no evidence of "Dark Matter" at all. Billions have been wasted trying to find it over the course of decades with no positive result. It doesn't exist.

The entire DM hypothesis stems from a failure of the Einstein/Hubble cosmological constant. It's a flaw in the theory of gravitation and it needs to be fixed. Inventing "the little man who wasn't there" is far from science. When observation fails to match theory, you change the theory, not the observation. That's called "science". What astrophysicists are doing now isn't science, it's voodoo.
BackBurner
2 / 5 (4) Aug 28, 2016
@BB
You are wrong on two counts. Consider refraining from making baseless claims.
- The term Nazi is German. The socialists were called Sozi.
https://en.wikipe...tymology
- Hitler called his party "socialist" as a decoy.


You're an idiot. I speak German. Fascism is now and always has been a derivative of socialism. It involves state control of industry (the means of production). That's it.

You revisionist "progressives" nauseate me. You don't even call *yourselves* socialists anymore because you don't like the taste.
BackBurner
2 / 5 (4) Aug 28, 2016
One of the things that confuses so *many* people about fascism is they don't understand that control of industry by the state is virtually indistinguishable from control of the state by industry; it's the same thing and it results in the same end.

Socialism cannot exist absent a central committee that controls society. It is, by it's nature, authoritarian and in full bloom totalitarian. There are no historical examples of socialist governments that were liberal and it's a tremendous insult to language and rational thought to allow socialists to call themselves "liberals", they are not liberal, nor are they progressive. Those are both co-opted labels intentionally adopted to hide the nature of the beast. Intellectual dishonesty is a hallmark of the socialist.
BackBurner
1.8 / 5 (5) Aug 28, 2016
@BB
I see that my advice comes too late.
One more thing. Already in 1922 it was pretty dumb to believe that the NSDAP was actually socialist.


THEY CALLED THEMSELVES SOCIALIST!

THey nationalized EVERYTHING, from healthcare to railroads. They nationalized cookware for god's sake. They invented the VOLKSWAGON!

How many clues do you need?

Facts you fool. Stick to the facts.
BackBurner
1 / 5 (3) Aug 28, 2016
@BB
You speak German and you still are wrong on two counts.
"Nazi was already, as an arbitrary example, a common expression in 1932 in the Dutch socialist press.


And this is supposed to prove what? That:

a) The Dutch don't speak German?
b) The NSDAP existed in 1932?
c) You've attempted a failed appeal to authority?
d) All of the above?
BackBurner
1 / 5 (3) Aug 28, 2016
I must admit that you are an even bigger idiot than I initially thought.


You think? I haven't seen any proof of that.
BackBurner
1 / 5 (3) Aug 28, 2016
@BB
You are W R O N G so spare me your stupid lists.
Speaking German does not guarantee knowledge of German history.


Nor does writing stupid bullshit on a science blog.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (7) Aug 28, 2016
The problem is, most -ism words are philo words and so by definition are undefinable. They have no meaning. They are worthless for explaining anything apart from how philos earn livings from doing nothing.

Like I say nazis were trying to bait commies by adopting red flags and slogans like Brot und Freiheit, and by calling themselves socialists. It also obscured their true intent and purpose. This is also incidently how trump and Hilary are baiting each other with the racist term.

WWII was planned as a nationalist war. All sorts of propaganda was used to provoke maximum animosity. This included the mangling of already well-mangled terms.
BackBurner
1 / 5 (3) Aug 28, 2016
Btw BB everything else you say is also wrong.


Yeah and your mother wears army boots. Neiner Neiner Neiner!

Wart.
BackBurner
1 / 5 (3) Aug 28, 2016
The Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache (2002) agrees with me.


How special for you! You've just successfully demonstrated what I and at least one other person on this *very thread* have told you; the word "nazi" is a portmanteau (look it up). It's an anglicization of NSDAP, in other words it was not a term adopted by the NSDAP party.

Now, exactly what do you expect that proves?

PS: The North Vietnamese didn't call themselves "gooks" or "charlie" either. Get it yet?
leetennant
4.2 / 5 (5) Aug 28, 2016
North Korea is actually the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea. That's how I know they're really democratic. What they do or say is irrelevant compared to that.

Semantics is way better than substance. And if we find out what fascism and Nazism really were, then we might have to stop voting for fascists. And Trump is just the destructive populist racist we want to justify voting for right now.

Sure he believes in corporatism wrapped in nationalism with a side of racialism. And sure that's literally the traditional definition of fascism and his policies could have been taken from Mussolini's treatise - he even uses the 'Third Way' concept daily.

Nazism? Pfft. Nothing to see here...
leetennant
4.2 / 5 (5) Aug 28, 2016
In case the sarcasm was lost on you, fascism and Nazism are and have always been extreme RIGHT wing philosophies. Anyway who tells you differently is a right wing apologist trying to disassociate their policies from their Mussolini and Hitler origins. People with fascist policies are fascist. That is all.

Also, all these political science discussions have literally nothing to do with the science of climate change. And the idea you're still stuck in early 20th century political binaries would be hilarious if you weren't attempting to vote every few years. Move on. This is about evidence and what works. Not about political dichotomies constructed by being raised in a two-party political system. Break free, guys. There's a whole 21st century out here.
leetennant
4.4 / 5 (7) Aug 28, 2016
Yes, welcome to 2016. Where socialism is always communism and fascism has been conveniently removed from history. It's kind of fucking terrifying. Or it would be if the reality of climate change wasn't even worse.
BackBurner
1 / 5 (5) Aug 28, 2016
In case the sarcasm was lost on you, fascism and Nazism are and have always been extreme RIGHT wing philosophies


@leetennant:

No. Mussolini was a student of Marx and promoted the idea that the people (the State) should control the means of production. He was a revolutionary Socialist, a fact that is both self-admitted and a matter of historic record. He wasn't "right wing" in any accepted use of the term.

The polarity of left and right is best reduced to collectivism vs. individualism. That is the dimensionality of the terms under discussion. If you deny that basic definition there's nothing further to discuss.

Fascism is inherently collectivist and is a branch of Socialist/Communist thought. Liberalism is essentially individualist, it promotes individual rights, private property and is compatible with the capitalist economic system, which is based on free markets.

If you don't already understand that essential difference we have no common ground to communicate.
leetennant
4.4 / 5 (7) Aug 28, 2016
And today in opposite world...

You do know the entire concept of fascism was framed by former socialists AGAINST socialism? Like they literally went "I don't like this socialism thing anymore so I will make something different".

So unless you think socialism is "really" capitalism because all socialists were originally part of the market economy then you need to rethink things a little. Your lack of logical thinking skills is showing.
BackBurner
1 / 5 (5) Aug 28, 2016
The nazi's liked sarcasm. To call themselves socialism was the same sarcasm as "Arbeit macht Frei"


Fizzy, You were on my ignore list for a long time until someone responded (and quoted) something intelligent you said regarding physics. So I took you off the ignore list and that's pretty much how I ended up here.

My guess is you hold an advanced degree in something, possibly physics, and you're an academic. You seem to think that because you hold that degree you're an expert on just about everything. We call this "arrogance", a disease you have in spades.

You have no real understanding of history or political systems. I can tell you have some native intelligence. Use it to shut yourself up and learn something about topics you aren't familiar with?

BackBurner
1 / 5 (5) Aug 28, 2016
You do know the entire concept of fascism was framed by former socialists AGAINST socialism?


@leetennant

No, I don't know that at all. Mussolini, as I mentioned, was a radical Socialist. I didn't make it up and you can easily verify it. Fascism is Mussolini's version of Socialism, only slightly modified. His approach was to take control of industry through regulation (e.g. the EPA) rather than just line them up (industrialists/capitalists) against a wall an shoot them.

It worked. He took over Italy and Hitler followed his lead. The rest is history. It's not complex at all and it's very well documented.

I'll just assume this was addressed to me.
leetennant
5 / 5 (6) Aug 28, 2016
Documented where? On Tea Party blogs entitled "Why We're Not Fascists, Look Over There!"

The entire "right/left" dichotomy was a post-war construction based on the opposing economic theories developed in the last 19th, early 20th century that ended up being proxies for nationalism in the second world war. The left wing developed from socialism, the right from fascism. You want to talk about things not being "complex at all". In that respect it's not.

The modern right came from fascism. In the last 10 years there's been this awful campaign to rewrite history to make it seem like it had no historical development at all, Like, the codification of all political philosophies came out of the reality of the second world war but somehow the far right just appeared out of nowhere. It's bullshit. And transparent bullshit at that.
BackBurner
1 / 5 (7) Aug 28, 2016
Documented where? On Tea Party blogs entitled "Why We're Not Fascists, Look Over There!"


Lee? This isn't Poly-Sci 310, "Introduction to Political Systems Theory". Use the words "Mussolini" and "Socialist" in a web search. It isn't difficult.
leetennant
5 / 5 (8) Aug 28, 2016
I give up. Honestly. I feel like I'm arguing with a two year old and it's not just on this thread. Yes, climate change isn't real, fascism never existed, semantics is more important than substance. And gravity is a socialist conspiracy to stop me exercising my God-given right to jump off buildings. I hope you enjoy the reality you've constructed. Just be careful of the unicorns. Those bastards are responsible for *everything*.
BackBurner
1 / 5 (6) Aug 28, 2016
I give up.


A wise course of action. Spend some time educating yourself. I won't do it unless you have money.
BackBurner
1 / 5 (6) Aug 28, 2016
And BTW Lee? I actually would have helped you with this is you weren't such an arrogant dickehead. I educate people for free when they engage me in a way that isn't openly antagonistic. You do that, the price goes right out the window :)

Let me guess; you were born right around 1985?
BackBurner
1 / 5 (6) Aug 28, 2016
I agree. In my country there is also a modern day Goebbels who claims Hitler was a socialist.


Why would a modern day Socialist openly identify with Hitler Fizzy? Why? Who? What sort of political suicide would that be Fizzy?

Do you bother thinking before you type or is that one of those things (thinking) you just don't do?
BackBurner
1 / 5 (7) Aug 28, 2016
You do understand Goebbels was a NAZI right? A card carrying member of the National Socialist Democratic Worker's Party? You got that part? Yet?

Or were you talking about Bernie Sanders, the National Socialist Democrat? :)
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (7) Aug 29, 2016
@backburn regurgitated
There is no evidence of "Dark Matter" at all
for starters, until you actually know WTF "dark matter" [DM] means, then you're talking out your own buttocks

for two:
the observed evidence is *why* we have DM in the standard theory

IOW- we see observational evidence and therefore we've used a placeholder name of "dark matter" to attempt to define the observational evidence

if this link ( https://en.wikipe...evidence ) is too technical then i can search for something simpler for you to comprehend
The entire DM hypothesis stems from a failure of the Einstein/Hubble cosmological constant
uhm... whut?

WTF are you talking about?

perhaps you should at least attempt to read the above link before commenting further and making yourself look worse?
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (7) Aug 29, 2016
I educate people for free when they engage me in a way that isn't openly antagonistic
@backburner
sorry, i can't see this one unless you're teaching underwater basket-weaving or something because, and i'm being direct and truthful not "openly antagonistic", you've completely misunderstood some very basic stuff ... and it is really not that hard to comprehend

more to the point: as noted above, the *entire reason* DM is a modern theory is because of the evidence, not just observed but also because we actually validated the living sh*t out of GR, etc.

might i also point out that philosophy, religion, politics and opinion are all entirely subjective?

science isn't - that is something important that you're ignoring, IMHO
nrauhauser
5 / 5 (1) Aug 29, 2016
The Trinity test will be the golden spike - the prior stuff with carbon exhumation mimics natural processes, but nothing our planet does of its own accord puts U-235 fission products in the air.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.5 / 5 (8) Aug 29, 2016
National Socialist Democratic Worker's Party? You got that part? Yet?
Actually NSDAP is short for Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. No democracy in there. No English in there.

A common mistake but there are lots of people who don't know what they're talking about eh?

Doesn't keep them from talking does it?
antigoracle
1 / 5 (4) Aug 29, 2016
My sense is that what is really going on - is that folks so badly need to support their own specific ideology

Yeah, like preaching about the evils of CO2 but then boasting how you spewed over half a ton in just 2 days. That's over 10% of the annual average.
antigoracle
1 / 5 (4) Aug 29, 2016
goracle - I suspect your comments are directed at me. I do have you on ignore - and will never look at one of your comments again - but also not going to let your hate filled - filth control who gets to post on an open forum.

Yep, turn a blind eye, as you have with burning fossil fuel like there is no tomorrow. Keep pretending you care, like your False "Profit" Al, you'll save the world.
Zzzzzzzz
2.6 / 5 (5) Aug 29, 2016
Excuse me, but the bleeding-heart liberals were not the ones burning folk alive in the Inquisitions, or chopping off heads in the Middle East. Religion does that. Ignorance and hubris do that. Organized insanity does that.


On the other hand, the arrogance of atheists that they could 'reshape' mankind in their idea of a utopia led to the mass death and misery of the 20th century. Atheists murdered more people in a far shorter time span in the 20th century than all the religious atrocities in history.

And when you factor in that most religious atrocities were actually 'secular' atrocities that just used religion as a justification, the evil of atheists in the 20th century is even more jaw dropping.

Damn, just when I thought the level of delusion on this site was unsurpassable.... another brain dead idiot appears to take it all to a new level
Zzzzzzzz
2.6 / 5 (5) Aug 29, 2016
Its a nice marketing gimmick...but since when are geologic time periods named after the dominant fauna? Am I missing something, and they have named them all after which ever fauna was most prominent during the time periods?

You're missing something. You might be missing all of it.
Zzzzzzzz
2.6 / 5 (5) Aug 29, 2016
The Anthropocene has BEEN here. At least since the 18th century, probably longer.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.