If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
While we are just starting now to see the effects of climate change, you ain't seen nothing yet. The effects will intensify over the coming decades and centuries. The sooner we address the problem, the easier it will be to solve.
You invoke the magic nose goblins of the Church of the Impending Climate Catastrophe yet again. You are right that we haven't seen anything yet. That is why you have to posit some unpleasant consequences centuries into the future. Your Sacred Climate Computer Models have not been able to predict consequences over the short term, so why should we trust their projections over the long term and conveniently transfer our wealth to the snake oil salesmen who are trying to convince us of the veracity of their conclusions. Ignore the man behind the curtain and focus on the great and powerful Oz. Unfortunately for them we did get a glimpse behind the curtain with the release of the climategate emails and despite the unconvincing whitewashes by the self interested the stink remains.
Mankind has survived when the climate was much warmer than it is today specifically and most recently in the medieval warming period when we didn't have the benefit of all of today's technology.
They are working on techniques for Ocean Mining. There are lots of minerals down there.
They already have offshore oil production. I suspect they will find a lot more.
That's over and above what known to exist onshore and what has still to be developed.
Anyone who is hanging their hat on running out of resources as the punishment for our iniquities is going to be sorely disappointed. For all intents and purposes our resources are greater than our needs over any realistic time frame.
There is a balancing problem of right-wing corporate funding of university research, which may be skewering the "science".
Bob A
It's a real possibility that the stick is being at least somewhat bent the other way, too, as you say. Here's an interesting link, which in turn has a number of potentially interesting links that caught my eye (e.g. with titles like 'Scientists behaving badly'). Note that government funding (which may or may not reflect an unheathy left- or right-wing interest, depending who's in power) is the (relatively minor?) alternative to corporate funding for funding of at least some types of such research:
You invoke the magic nose goblins of the Church of the Impending Climate Catastrophe yet again. You are right that we haven't seen anything yet. That is why you have to posit some unpleasant consequences centuries into the future. Your Sacred Climate Computer Models have not been able to predict consequences over the short term, so why should we trust their projections over the long term and conveniently transfer our wealth to the snake oil salesmen who are trying to convince us of the veracity of their conclusions. Ignore the man behind the curtain and focus on the great and powerful Oz. Unfortunately for them we did get a glimpse behind the curtain with the release of the climategate emails and despite the unconvincing whitewashes by the self interested the stink remains.
Mankind has survived when the climate was much warmer than it is today specifically and most recently in the medieval warming period when we didn't have the benefit of all of today's technology.
I thought maybe a reasonable debate on this topic was possible. I guess not.
Signing out on this thread again,
but then....NO!...stop it, stop typing, I mean it this time,
but ....no stop typing, stop typ..............zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Last edited by Bob Gillanders; Thursday, 27th March, 2014, 09:26 AM.
I thought maybe a reasonable debate on this topic was possible. I guess not.
Signing out on this thread again,
but then....NO!...stop it, stop typing, I mean it this time,
but ....no stop typing, stop typ..............zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
In order for people to take your computer models seriously you have to show that they have some predictive value. So far their record has been extremely poor and the predicted effects have not materialized. You are asking everyone to rearrange everything for the benefit of the climate scientists and petty bureaucrats due to the impending disaster due to this man made global warming. There is a burden of proof on those who seek to profit from this supposed anthropogenic global warming. You should be able to demonstrate by now that the early predictions for temperature rise have actually come to pass beyond random error. You are arguing for a massive change to the status quo including a huge increase in taxes and increased prices for our electricity and so far all you've given us is
..............zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Apparently there is nothing to see here. Everyone lets just move along.
I thought maybe a reasonable debate on this topic was possible. I guess not.
Signing out on this thread again,
You're up against the four fundamentalisms, as described by Henry Giroux: market fundamentalism, that the "invisible hand" of the market will magically solve all problems of distribution and of the economy generally and, perhaps more importantly, that this neo-liberal idolatry also includes the cancerous delusion that growth can be permanent, despite dwindling resources and (cough cough) accumulating greenhouse gases; religious fundamentalism, in which the "chosen" will, in any case, be "raptured" to heaven no matter what happens on Earth (and everyone else can go to Hell, literally); military fundamentalism - don't forget the military is probably the greatest polluter, customer of fossil fuel (and therefore contributor to greenhouse gases), etc., with a sociopathic unwillingness to treat global problems, like global warming, terrorism, etc. as shared problems but rather as something to foist on the hapless "other" through "regime change" and force of violence; and, finally, educational fundamentalism, in which there is an apoplectic and genuine hatred of learning, science, and education in general. Hence the venom towards the almost universally agreed evidence of global warming and the urgent necessity to reduce the production of these gases to a sustainable level.
The four horsemen of the apocalypse.
A tough act to beat.
Dogs will bark, but the caravan of chess moves on.
You're up against the four fundamentalisms, as described by Henry Giroux: market fundamentalism, that the "invisible hand" of the market will magically solve all problems of distribution and of the economy generally and, perhaps more importantly, that this neo-liberal idolatry also includes the cancerous delusion that growth can be permanent, despite dwindling resources and (cough cough) accumulating greenhouse gases;
The market does handle things better than the politicians intent on redistribution do. Increased CO2 should lead simply to more plant growth.
religious fundamentalism, in which the "chosen" will, in any case, be "raptured" to heaven no matter what happens on Earth (and everyone else can go to Hell, literally);
You are quite ignorant with respect to my religious beliefs but don't let your ignorance get in the way of a good theory that has little basis in reality much like anthropogenic global warming. Only a very tiny subset of the Christian community believe in the type of rapture which you are describing.
military fundamentalism - don't forget the military is probably the greatest polluter, customer of fossil fuel (and therefore contributor to greenhouse gases), etc., with a sociopathic unwillingness to treat global problems, like global warming, terrorism, etc. as shared problems but rather as something to foist on the hapless "other" through "regime change" and force of violence;
Ironic coming from you who was musing on casting people out of the lifeboat. Socialists and communists always like to pretend that they are sheep just long enough to gain access to the levers of power at which point their true nature is immediately apparent. People that hate humanity as the unholy coalition that is behind the Church of the Impending Global Warming Catastrophe does cannot be expected to act in humanity's best interests. On offer is slavery. No thanks. Imagine a world government run by the Ontario government and you have a good idea of what results you can expect from these people.
You want to replace the market with central planning. It has never worked anywhere and inevitably leads to the death of millions by oppressive regimes but we can just ignore history and join your experiment as things are going to work out differently this time.
Give me back my broken night
My mirrored room, my secret life
It's lonely here
There's no one left to torture
Give me absolute control
Over every living soul
And lie beside me, baby
That's an order
- Leonard Cohen
and, finally, educational fundamentalism, in which there is an apoplectic and genuine hatred of learning, science, and education in general.
ummm.... No. I don't think that's it. How many consecutive years of the models not being predictive will it take for you to cut your losses and admit the models might be wrong? Twenty years? Thirty? Fifty?
Hence the venom towards the almost universally agreed evidence of global warming and the urgent necessity to reduce the production of these gases to a sustainable level.
Simply repeating lies over and over and over does not make them any less false. If there were really the type of consensus that you are claiming we would already have the carbon credit exchanges successfully up and running. They seem to be failing everywhere.
The four horsemen of the apocalypse.
A tough act to beat.
When they said repent repent
I wonder what they meant
- Leonard Cohen
If you had the truth on your side you would have succeeded by now. You don't. That is why you have to give us references from DailyKOS and widely ignored propoganda sources who can be easily shown to be telling demonstrable lies. And that is why you fail.
Last edited by Vlad Drkulec; Thursday, 27th March, 2014, 02:50 PM.
“Civilization, in fact, grows more maudlin and hysterical; especially under democracy it tends to degenerate into a mere combat of crazes; the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.
― H.L. Mencken
“The plain fact is that education is itself a form of propaganda - a deliberate scheme to outfit the pupil, not with the capacity to weigh ideas, but with a simple appetite for gulping ideas ready-made. The aim is to make 'good' citizens, which is to say, docile and uninquisitive citizens.”
― H.L. Mencken
"The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos."
― H.L. Mencken
"The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos."
― H.L. Mencken
No need to cite others especially this one. Do you have to say something own? "the man who is able to think" LOL
India is the world's 4th largest energy consumer behind the U.S., China and Russia. Something like 56% of their energy comes from coal. The climate change group seems to be fighting a losing battle.
India is the world's 4th largest energy consumer behind the U.S., China and Russia. Something like 56% of their energy comes from coal. The climate change group seems to be fighting a losing battle.
I am sure that they will move on to the next scam.
China was also building coal fired electricity plants at a furious rate. If CO2 were actually such a good greenhouse gas it might be to our advantage as the people watching the sun suggest the next 50 years will see average temperatures drop 3 degrees Celsius due to the effects of sun spots which will have major negative consequences on feeding the masses. The gloom and doomers may get their way but from the opposite direction due to global cooling. I wonder how they will try to spin that in order to obtain more funding.
An author of the forthcoming Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on climate change has asked for his name to be removed from a summary document because of its "four horsemen of the apocalypse" rhetoric.
Professor Richard Tol, an economist at the University of Sussex who was the convening lead author of the chapter on economics, asked for his name to be removed from a summary document provided to policy makers.
He said: "The message in the first draft was that through adaptation and clever development these were manageable risks, but it did require we get our act together. This has completely disappeared from the draft now, which is all about the impacts of climate change and the four horsemen of the apocalypse. This is a missed opportunity."
Tweet
Comment