Anthropogenic Negative Climate Change (ANCC)

[Bob Armstrong]

The Ancient Practice of Fossil Fuel Extraction, Transport & Sale

The Americas - Canada

Trans Mountain Pipeline (Canadian Government Owned)

Trans Mountain pulls out and tries again with drilling under Fraser River. World's greatest salmon river subjected to 'trial and error' as they fumble and spew toxic by-waste in the process.

https://twitter.com/PPSTMX1/status/1478418924827930625

Addition # 1

More egregious behaviour by Trans Mountain

Trans Mountain fights to sidestep fire bylaws at Burnaby terminal

https://www.nationalobserver.com/202...rnaby-terminal

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Brad Thomson]

.With all due respect, Brad, the simple phenomena of optical illusions (leaving aside the complex issues of delusions and hallucinations) are incompatible with 'idealism'

So Dliip Panjwani, right here on Chesstalk before our very eyes, with one simple sentence, has refuted Plato, Descartes, Berkeley, Hume, Kant, Hegel and many, many more of the greatest thinkers history has ever produced. I might also add that now solved is the most eternal philosophical question in both the Eastern and Western traditions. Truth has at long last arrived, and right here on Chesstalk. Yet Hugh Brodie only wants us to talk about chess?!

[Pargat Perrer]

So Dliip Panjwani, right here on Chesstalk before our very eyes, with one simple sentence, has refuted Plato, Descartes, Berkeley, Hume, Kant, Hegel and many, many more of the greatest thinkers history has ever produced. I might also add that now solved is the most eternal philosophical question in both the Eastern and Western traditions. Truth has at long last arrived, and right here on Chesstalk. Yet Hugh Brodie only wants us to talk about chess?!

That's quite good, Brad! Saying "right here before our eyes" after Dilip mentions optical illusions! :)

[Brad Thomson]

That's quite good, Brad! Saying "right here before our eyes" after Dilip mentions optical illusions! :)

I would have been pleased to offer an honest answer rather than a sarcastic one had the post asked how idealists react to such questions rather than simply suggesting that idealism could be so easily refuted and that the poster was therefore right while so many historical philosophical geniuses were wrong and had overlooked such a simple refutation to their positions. Some people like to learn, some just like to try to prove how smart they are. Often they makes arrogant fools of themselves in the process. I have never claimed that materialism is refuted, quite the opposite, I have suggested that it is a reasonable position with its own set of arguments. I have stated that I am more convinced by the arguments for idealism, but I have not been so arrogant and stupid as to suggest that, "with all due respect" materialism can be refuted with one simple little sentence.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Brad - re your questions on climate change in your post # 58 of 22/1/4: Here is what I have written on this # 1 question:

Climate Change & Nature's "Tipping Point"
22/1/3//Most Recent Editing: 22/1/6


We live on Earth in a Natural Environment (Including the Atmosphere) and a man-made environment. Historically, Nature has inherently followed the principles of “balance”, and thus “sustainability”. So we have had a stable environment in which to evolve, and live, 'til now.

Then man discovered manufacturing, and the use of fuels that significantly polluted the air (The level of air below the stratosphere). But the polluting then extended into the upper atmosphere itself. Impervious gases started to collect in the outer edge of the atmosphere, and man started forming around the Earth, an impervious canopy.

Fortunately, this canopy still let in the sunlight; but unfortunately it also started to trap the sun's heat coming in to Earth. This warming of the atmosphere, water and land (Global Warming) caused the “climate” to shift. One of the consequences was warmth migrating north and south of the equator, and weather extremes started appearing across the planet.

Consequently man has set himself on a suicidal path. When will the sucide happen? Well, we are not at the start of the suicidal period yet. The issue is whether we will reverse this polluting of the atmosphere, and get better at “scrubbing” the atmosphere and taking pollutants out of the air.

Years ago, there were a flurry of scientific projections that came out as awareness of the seriousness of climate change, and its dangers, grew. Scientists projected at that time that we had somewhat more than a decade to avoid disaster. They coined the term “Tipping Point” for the date beyond which Nature, which had had a balance healthy for man, would no longer, by its natural processes, be able to regain its historical balance. Once the tipping point is passed, there will arise a “new balance” which will create an environment lethally hostile to man (And lots of our co-resident species).

At that time, using the scientific calculations, the tipping point was expected to be reached around Jan. 1, 2031. Now that is less than 9 years away. There have been no significant improvement in polluting our environment (Changes have been touted by governments across the world, but in fact are really minimalist – lip service). So I see no reason to change the projection, unless something dramatic and revolutionary starts happening. From a polticial point of view, the planet operates on capitalism as its economy and polity. It needs growth, and sales, to reap profit. It is unwilling to give up growinig profit, and some improvement in short-term quality of life, and so will work AGAINST the needed radical changes in how man operates, and lives in society, such that this suicide path can be avoided.

Though we are already feeling many of the effects of the climate change man is generating, the science seems to say that we have the tools right now to start with positive climate change initiatives, to try to put back the natural balance of our environment, but only if we cat NOW. We are NOT!

Humans will start to die out after we pass the Jan. 1, 2031 "Tipping Point" of Nature without any change. It will be slow but steady, and it will not be long before man will be a part of Earth's history.

Question # 2 - do you see any possible chance that we geniuses on this planet will shut down the economy sufficiently to meet this "tipping point" target by that time?

My Answer - as you can see from the above, I see the problem as systemic.......it is not a problem of individuals, or, as you believe, over-population. The decisions will not be made by any capitalist system because their mission is to "maximize profit". To this end they are short-sighted, and push any environmental control envelopes to the limit, including breaking the law. This system will never make the radical change in the whole life-style of human society needed to avoid passing the tipping point. From what you have written, you seem to agree with my answer.........if I've got something different than you, please clarify.

~ Bob A (T-SB)

[Bob Armstrong]

Truth-Seekers/Publishers Promotional

Earlier in this thread, I introduced a new organization I and a friend had founded, called Truth-Seekers Brigade (T-SB)

We now realize that getting the "Truth", is of no benefit to society if the Truth-Seeker just hordes that "Truth", whatever kind it may be .It must be given out to the community, to raise the awareness of the society of what the true reality out there is.

Thus we have changed the name of the organization to: Truth-Seekers/Publishers (T-S/P)

So.....below is the new promotional material. It is now being posted on Twitter, and a number of Fb Accounts, to spread the word, and attract new members.

Truth-Seekers/Publishers (T-S/P)

Something a bit fun, and a bit serious.

A friend of mine and I (Bob Armstrong) have formed a new organization (No administration) called:

The Truth-Seekers/Publishers (T-S/P)

To become a member, you must use your first name at the bottom of all posts, and after it put in brackets: T-S/P

There is no screening process; there is no membership list: there is no head office; there is no secretariat!

You merely have to self-identify as a "Truth-Seeker/Publisher" and start signing as all members are required to sign.

Not too onerous, eh ? (Am I giving away my nationality here?)

The theory is this:

If many people start seeking out, and posting, "The Truth" as they see it, and ask hard questions of those who hold the truth, where it is being hidden, this action will help raise the level of world awareness of the “true reality” in which we live.

A journey of a 1000 kilometers begins with a single step. You can help change the world!.

This piece is intended to be promotional. If you are going to join the T-S/P, or if you just think this project has merit, please assist by sharing/copying & pasting this promo for your friends, and others, to see, and consider.

Thanks.




21/12/27//Most Recent Editing: 22/1/6

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Brad: Re your post # 57 of 21/1/4

Thanks for answering my "Solipsism" question so clearly.

I had not realized that the Idealist holds for a "Direct Realist Theory of Perception". This is a follow-up to Plato's concept of the "Ideas", a world of perfection where every object exists in its complete self,

But then Plato, as I understand him, accepts that there is also the "real, objective world" as well, a different plane of existence. But it is an imperfect plane of existence. He referred to it as the world of "Shadows of the Ideas or Ideals". The shadow is imperfect......it reflects the Reality of the World of Ideas, but only imperfectly, as does the shadow of a tree.

Whether there is a reality out there or not is certainly an age-old question.

I myself go with Phenomenology (Edmund Husserl). There is an objective reality out there, but our consciousness, because of past life experience, project onto whatever is really out there, all kinds of characteristics, that are subjective, not objective. So there may be some pieces of wood objectively. But different perceivers overlay it: it is a "chair"; it is "art"; it is "firewood", it is "oak", it is potentially a "table", etc. We must peel back our subjective attributions to reality, like layers of an onion, to discover the real "reality" out there.

~ Bob A (T-s/P)

[Bob Armstrong]

ANCC Thread Weekly Stats

Covering Dec. 30, 2021 (Day after the original post) to and including Wed., Jan. 5, 2022 (Wk # 1)

Views - 125 per day
Responses - 9 per day

My analysis is that this is a very decent rate of participation, especially given that initially, more responses dealt with what I've referred to as the "attached issues", which have wandered into philosophy, especially epistemology, and theology.

But the more recent posts are more on the main topic of climate change, such as the one on "Nature's Tipping Point".

If this persists, we will see what the stats look like in comparison, in week # 2, which starts today (22/1/6).

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Bob Armstrong]

Brad and Dilip were the main discussers of the "attached issue": Materialism (Dilip) vs Idealism (Brad).

Dilip and I have been the main discussers of the "attached issue": Determinism (Dilip) vs Free Will (Bob).

On this latter issue, I am also discussing it on another Fb site. So I present two interesting pieces on this debate, one an article,, one a video:

Free Will

https://iai.tv/articles/free-will-vs...yduwafUOg_-UpY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCGtkDzELAI

Let me know what you think!

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Brad Thomson]

My Answer - as you can see from the above, I see the problem as systemic.......it is not a problem of individuals, or, as you believe, over-population. The decisions will not be made by any capitalist system because their mission is to "maximize profit". To this end they are short-sighted, and push any environmental control envelopes to the limit, including breaking the law. This system will never make the radical change in the whole life-style of human society needed to avoid passing the tipping point. From what you have written, you seem to agree with my answer.........if I've got something different than you, please clarify.

I think we essentially agree, though I would defend my assertion with respect to population. Industrialization/capitalism worked until we grew too big, until our numbers became too large. Now there is no more room for growth. If the pandemic kills off half of us within the next year or two, this will buy us time and move the tipping point farther into the future. I suspect this is God/Nature's plan. Yes, as you say the problem is systemic, but it is also numerical in my view. We have outgrown the limited size of the planet, a certain number of ourselves exploiting the planet will not upset the balance, but we are far past that safe number, it seems to me.

[Brad Thomson]

I had not realized that the Idealist holds for a "Direct Realist Theory of Perception". This is a follow-up to Plato's concept of the "Ideas", a world of perfection where every object exists in its complete self...But then Plato, as I understand him, accepts that there is also the "real, objective world" as well, a different plane of existence. But it is an imperfect plane of existence. He referred to it as the world of "Shadows of the Ideas or Ideals". The shadow is imperfect......it reflects the Reality of the World of Ideas, but only imperfectly, as does the shadow of a tree.

Plato is difficult. I recently took a course that included the entire work of Parmenides, Plato's dialogue titled Parmenides, and Heidegger's book/lectures titled Parmenides. The interpretation of Plato that came out of the course, propounded by the professor and fully agreed with by myself, suggests that the Platonic "forms" are not, contrary to what most interpretation has contended, permanent and unchanging realities existing behind the changing world we live in. Rather the forms are fleeting glimpses, understandings, or in Berkeley's terms, notions. If we hear the word "book" for example, we have a fleeting glimpse of "bookness", or what it is that makes for a book, our understanding or notion of what a book is. But there is no permanent "bookness" eternally existing distinct from particular glimpses of the definition, or distinct from particular ideas of particular books.

[Bob Gillanders]

Humans will start to die out after we pass the Jan. 1, 2031 "Tipping Point" of Nature without any change.

I have a different definition of "tipping point". A tipping point is a significant event that may radically accelerate the effects of climate change beyond our ability to manage it, even if we all finally agree to tackle the problem. In other words, too late. One such tipping point may be the collapse of Thwaites Glacier in Antarctica.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MR6-...el=PBSNewsHour

Bob, please stop using specific dates like Jan 1, 2031. We don't know any specific dates. Models will make predictions based on current data and assumptions. Quoting specific dates just makes all this science appear to be silly.

Humans are already starting to die from the effects of climate change. Somebody should start reporting that.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Bob G:

The computer modelling, based on current trajectory, have given, and do give a date..........there is a definite "end point" beyond which the window of opportunity has closed. I see nothing wrong with using such date.

When there comes along a peer-reviewed scientific paper that says decisions made during this pre-suicide period are positive enough, that the start of the suicide has been pushed into the future, I will start using that date.

Humans need clarity in situations like this. A definite date forces one to see the window closing.

Of course, the suicide date is a bit of a continuum .... we are likely talking roughly somewhere between 6 months earlier, or maybe 6 months later. But this is ambiguous, and allows fuzzy thinking on the future course of the problem. A "reasonable" date in this continuum helps the human "focus" since the end point is certain (Even if it may be a bit wobbly). I disagree that it "makes the science appear to be silly".

Finally, I do meet your point somewhat, by trying to always say about my date, "on or about"......I do weasel a bit!

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Brad Thomson]

Mankind will not voluntarily do enough to prevent us from reaching the tipping point. Thus, there are three possible outcomes. We reach the tipping point, we are culled by the pandemic, or a miracle of sorts (Jesus returns, ET saves us...) takes place. My money is on the second alternative. We are being and will continue to be culled to reduce our numbers to the point where we can do no further damage. The Omega variant will do the trick.

[Bob Gillanders]

The computer modelling, based on current trajectory, have given, and do give a date..........

I trust you understand there are hundreds of computer models projecting the effects of climate change.
They all have input data, a set of assumptions, and multiple projected outcomes.
Saying there is a specific date when a tipping point is reached is very misleading.

I don't agree with your approach. On Jan 2, some idiot will claim climate change was all a hoax.

Humans need clarity in situations like this. A definite date forces one to see the window closing.

Remember Bob, this is chesstalk. Clarity of thought, not so much!