Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers.

[Spendulus]

They also thought the sun revolved around the earth

An interesting exercise is to consider transformations between coordinate systems.  Of course there are some in which the sun revolves around the earth.  Everything in the universe is moving relative to every other thing.  Clearly an irrefutable point of view exists that from a particular coordinate system, the universe revolves around the Earth.

The correct rebuttal to this is to note the offsetting effect of centrifugal force of the Earth spinning to the force of gravity.

But we don't understand gravity.

[Onews1990]

Climate deniers are annoying to listen (or read) basically because the stream is moving the other way, but it's surprisingly dictator'ing to censor people based on their opinion if they haven't broken the rules of civilized conversation.

[Spendulus]

Climate deniers are annoying to listen (or read) basically because the stream is moving the other way, but it's surprisingly dictator'ing to censor people based on their opinion if they haven't broken the rules of civilized conversation.

I don't actually quite know what that (bolded) means.

For example, a social get together in Los Angeles, the denier voicing his opinion that the recent mudslides were obviously not caused by man made AGW would be verboten. 

[Wilikon]

Climate deniers are annoying to listen (or read) basically because the stream is moving the other way, but it's surprisingly dictator'ing to censor people based on their opinion if they haven't broken the rules of civilized conversation.

At least climate deniers like myself will not ban you from expressing your speech on my little thread. How refreshing it is to drink from that stream isn't it?  

[zero3112]

Global warming is a scientific theory not a fact. Its just one of many different theory's that tries to explain climate change. I agree that climate change cant be dismissed its clear its happening but the theory behind how or why its happening just remains a theory.

One theory is global warming which believes human activity and CO2 cause the warming of the planet. This is already wrong since the planet as been cooling for the last decade. Plus the planet was warmer then it is now during the Roman, Medieval Times. There was little human activity no cars, no factory's polluting yet it was warmer then than it is now. So CO2 could easily be ruled out.

However climate change which is different from global warming believes the climate is changing irregularly and this can be severe weather changes and temperature changes.


Climate change is fact.  But climate change theory's are just a theory of how it may be happening none of have been proven. When people say global warming is false there not deniers they just don't agree with that one theory that tries to explain climate change.

[Wilikon]

Global warming is a scientific theory not a fact. Its just one of many different theory's that tries to explain climate change. I agree that climate change cant be dismissed its clear its happening but the theory behind how or why its happening just remains a theory.

One theory is global warming which believes human activity and CO2 cause the warming of the planet. This is already wrong since the planet as been cooling for the last decade. Plus the planet was warmer then it is now during the Roman, Medieval Times. There was little human activity no cars, no factory's polluting yet it was warmer then than it is now. So CO2 could easily be ruled out.

However climate change which is different from global warming believes the climate is changing irregularly and this can be severe weather changes and temperature changes.


Climate change is fact.  But climate change theory's are just a theory of how it may be happening none of have been proven. When people say global warming is false there not deniers they just don't agree with that one theory that tries to explain climate change.

I believe most here would agree with you assertion. Reddit banned the people not following and believing in the rigid orthodoxy of the Church of the Anthropogenic (man-made) global warming 

[strombert]

31 pages, did someone mention Geo Engineering here? let me check..

[Spendulus]

Climate deniers are annoying to listen (or read) basically because the stream is moving the other way, but it's surprisingly dictator'ing to censor people based on their opinion if they haven't broken the rules of civilized conversation.

At least climate deniers like myself will not ban you from expressing your speech on my little thread. How refreshing it is to drink from that stream isn't it?  

However mired in drudgery and small thinking minds the "Famous Reddit Ban" may be, I for one would not be opposed to the occasional, Thor-like "lightning bolt from the blue" smashing to little bits a Warmie, after which we could all go back to welcoming an open intellectual discussion.

I mean, banning COULD be fun.  It could be a game.  There could be Bitcoin betting on who might get banned.  There could be a reward paid to the unfortunate Warmie who, upon vomiting the most objectionable combination of polar bears and Katrina and SUV, simply WON THE PRIZE.

[Wilikon]

Climate deniers are annoying to listen (or read) basically because the stream is moving the other way, but it's surprisingly dictator'ing to censor people based on their opinion if they haven't broken the rules of civilized conversation.

At least climate deniers like myself will not ban you from expressing your speech on my little thread. How refreshing it is to drink from that stream isn't it?  

However mired in drudgery and small thinking minds the "Famous Reddit Ban" may be, I for one would not be opposed to the occasional, Thor-like "lightning bolt from the blue" smashing to little bits a Warmie, after which we could all go back to welcoming an open intellectual discussion.

I mean, banning COULD be fun.  It could be a game.  There could be Bitcoin betting on who might get banned.  There could be a reward paid to the unfortunate Warmie who, upon vomiting the most objectionable combination of polar bears and Katrina and SUV, simply WON THE PRIZE.

That sounds like a full time job haha. I have to say banning people would be fun. But the best way, for me anyway, to make fun of a banner is to let him taste the full freedom of speech he steals from the people he crushed and let the world see it.

Also, if you want to know the heart of your nemesis, pour some honey on his tongue (don't google it. I just came up with this)

[Spendulus]

Climate deniers are annoying to listen (or read) basically because the stream is moving the other way, but it's surprisingly dictator'ing to censor people based on their opinion if they haven't broken the rules of civilized conversation.

At least climate deniers like myself will not ban you from expressing your speech on my little thread. How refreshing it is to drink from that stream isn't it?  

However mired in drudgery and small thinking minds the "Famous Reddit Ban" may be, I for one would not be opposed to the occasional, Thor-like "lightning bolt from the blue" smashing to little bits a Warmie, after which we could all go back to welcoming an open intellectual discussion.

I mean, banning COULD be fun.  It could be a game.  There could be Bitcoin betting on who might get banned.  There could be a reward paid to the unfortunate Warmie who, upon vomiting the most objectionable combination of polar bears and Katrina and SUV, simply WON THE PRIZE.

That sounds like a full time job haha. I have to say banning people would be fun. But the best way, for me anyway, to make fun of a banner is to let him taste the full freedom of speech he steals from the people he crushed and let the world see it.

Also, if you want to know the heart of your nemesis, pour some honey on his tongue (don't google it. I just came up with this)

OKAY, so I went to reddit.com/r/climate.

SUMMARY:  threads are reposted excerpts from mostly far left environmental groups - media matters, grist, think progress, and so forth, the most rational being from the huffington post.  About 25-30% of posts are actual scientific articles or subject matter, rest are environmental - political - propaganda.  The two moderators are yep, of course, propagandists and make no apologies about it.  

9 users browsing, dropped to 2 while I was there, 1-13 comments on the posts.

Now let me compare that with reddit.com/r/bitcoin.  Comments on posts:

229, 107, 96, 38, 58, 74, 126...no need to continue.  Wait...how many people were browsing the bitcoin threads? 1062!

So, reddit.com/r/climate is a complete objective FAIL.  This thread itself although wide ranging is far more downright interesting that their threads (and this one thread has more comments than all of theirs combined, going way back).  The WHY is interesting.

Because, well....their threads read like propaganda....DULL!!!

http://www.reddit.com/r/climate/

[Spendulus]

....
That sounds like a full time job haha. I have to say banning people would be fun. But the best way, for me anyway, to make fun of a banner is to let him taste the full freedom of speech he steals from the people he crushed and let the world see it. ....

Well, that's the story of the fall of totalitarian societies, the structures which the warmies would bring back.  Because of imagined necessity to control peoples' behavior and carbon output, of course.

So he'd just hate your freedom.

[AnonyMint]

Regarding my upthread point that climate change causes can't ever be falsified, because it is impossible...

Well I have to disagree.

Even the past is not definite. How do you prove what happened in the past? It is an argument about whose memory is accurate, yet each of us have a different aliasing error in our sampling (because no one samples the entire universe).

[snip]

anyway yeah I considered that, I rejected it (As per above post) I agree a memory of what happened can be subject to probabilistic outcomes, but it doesn't make sense that everything else seems to be made up of stuff between zero and one, but somehow the future and past are actually the same. They need an opposite. Clyde needs his bonnie.

They are opposing in that the past is inductive and the future is co-inductive. Also they are opposing in that there is not one past and one future, thus really they don't exist as aggregated entities (thus can't oppose each other).

Humans have a difficult time accepting diversity, because they can't know it all. Thus we erroneously gravitate towards absolute bullshit such as man-made climate change, as if one climate even exists.

[AnonyMint]

I don't know how electricity is priced in your place of residency, but in mine, the price of electricity for home users is mostly fixed and can change once or twice a year only. It will be difficult to adjust it if we see another x100 in bitcoin price within a year or two. If the client is a company it is "worst" because a lot of them have long term contracts with fixed prices.

If price doesn't increase consumers break down the doors of the electric company and City Hall. Price will increase damn fast when people don't have electricity. I am here in Davao, Mindanao and we are having rotating brownouts. The people and businesses are ready to strangle the necks of the politicians and so yes the price has risen and the new coal powerplants are being built (200MW to come online next year and more coming).

I agree price may not rise if the damn socialists who want subsidies are in control.

I agree that a higher price (of electricity) could solve the problem in the long term (5+ years). In the short term I except that the most polluting plants will just run at maximum capacity to deliver the required power.

Man-made climate and global environmental change is the most irrational thought a person could have. Start here on the definition of the scientific method.

2. That article assumes the genre and capital cost of the mining equipment is irrelevant. Thus with cpu-only mining, this problem will be much improved (...)

Yes it is (irrelevant). No it won't (be improved). Read the OP.

I assume you are referring to this point:

Hypothesis :
1. Miners are rational actors. Therefore once they have bought a mining rig, they will not stop it unless the cost of running it is higher than the price of the mined bitcoins. However if the price drops or if the difficulty grows too high they should stop mining.

You must have flunked Economics 101 because you forgot opportunity cost.

They can sell the hardware. Factor that in and you see my point was relevant.

Obviously for ASICs you are correct, but general purpose computers you would not be. That is another reason a cpu-only coin is needed.

[Wilikon]

....
That sounds like a full time job haha. I have to say banning people would be fun. But the best way, for me anyway, to make fun of a banner is to let him taste the full freedom of speech he steals from the people he crushed and let the world see it. ....

Well, that's the story of the fall of totalitarian societies, the structures which the warmies would bring back.  Because of imagined necessity to control peoples' behavior and carbon output, of course.

So he'd just hate your freedom.

... And then, on a deeper level, will end up hating himself as I am just a bunch of words on a forum for him. Nothing else.

[EinsteiniumWisdom]

Interesting article for you all to read, ignore all scientific facts in, and then bash cause it was not on ancient aliens or some other conspiracy documentary on the history channel   : http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2014/03/warming-world-shrinks-salamanders

[Spendulus]

Interesting article for you all to read, ignore all scientific facts in, and then bash cause it was not on ancient aliens or some other conspiracy documentary on the history channel   : http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2014/03/warming-world-shrinks-salamanders

I've seen that study, and thought it was interesting.  It's not a matter of bashing the scientific facts in the study, but ridiculing the alarmist hysteria unscientifically spread over and around the study.  EG, the groundless speculation and the innuendo that hints of an ecosystem out of whack, going wild as a result of man's CO2.

Here's one for you, rather unbelievable.  The High Priest of Warmies has became an Denier.

http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/04/03/green-guru-james-lovelock-on-climate-change-i-dont-think-anybody-really-knows-whats-happening-they-just-guess-lovelock-reverses-himself-on-global-warming/

[Wilikon]

Interesting article for you all to read, ignore all scientific facts in, and then bash cause it was not on ancient aliens or some other conspiracy documentary on the history channel   : http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2014/03/warming-world-shrinks-salamanders

Looks like Green Guru James Lovelock is an ancient alien based on your facts.

[Spendulus]

Interesting article for you all to read, ignore all scientific facts in, and then bash cause it was not on ancient aliens or some other conspiracy documentary on the history channel   : http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2014/03/warming-world-shrinks-salamanders

Looks like Green Guru James Lovelock is an ancient alien based on your facts.

The layering of controversy about "global warming" over and around the salamander study has obfuscated and prevented popular and scientific understanding of the phenomena and results studied.

The shrill calling out of "It's caused by global warming" when mudslides and torrential rains and droughts occur in the Western US Coast prevents understanding or discussion of basic regional weather, climate and meteorology, specifically the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.

The hinting, alluding of AGW as causative with the Katrina hurricane covered up bribes and corruption in the construction of the dikes.

Any time you put one thing in the news or in the scientific literature it pushes something else out of those media.  Nearly complete disinformation is the normal condition.

[Spendulus]

Interesting article for you all to read, ignore all scientific facts in, and then bash cause it was not on ancient aliens or some other conspiracy documentary on the history channel   : http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2014/03/warming-world-shrinks-salamanders

Looks like Green Guru James Lovelock is an ancient alien based on your facts.

I have studied Lovelock's ideas and concluded that he was a very sincere man, and very serious.  There are numerous others that appear to be this way.  (Bill Nye would be one, clearly....)

I do not have that impression about James Hansen or Michael Mann, or Suzuki.... 

There, there is that distinctive definite Krugman-like smell.

[Wilikon]

Climate deniers are annoying to listen (or read) basically because the stream is moving the other way, but it's surprisingly dictator'ing to censor people based on their opinion if they haven't broken the rules of civilized conversation.

At least climate deniers like myself will not ban you from expressing your speech on my little thread. How refreshing it is to drink from that stream isn't it?  

However mired in drudgery and small thinking minds the "Famous Reddit Ban" may be, I for one would not be opposed to the occasional, Thor-like "lightning bolt from the blue" smashing to little bits a Warmie, after which we could all go back to welcoming an open intellectual discussion.

I mean, banning COULD be fun.  It could be a game.  There could be Bitcoin betting on who might get banned.  There could be a reward paid to the unfortunate Warmie who, upon vomiting the most objectionable combination of polar bears and Katrina and SUV, simply WON THE PRIZE.

That sounds like a full time job haha. I have to say banning people would be fun. But the best way, for me anyway, to make fun of a banner is to let him taste the full freedom of speech he steals from the people he crushed and let the world see it.

Also, if you want to know the heart of your nemesis, pour some honey on his tongue (don't google it. I just came up with this)

OKAY, so I went to reddit.com/r/climate.

SUMMARY:  threads are reposted excerpts from mostly far left environmental groups - media matters, grist, think progress, and so forth, the most rational being from the huffington post.  About 25-30% of posts are actual scientific articles or subject matter, rest are environmental - political - propaganda.  The two moderators are yep, of course, propagandists and make no apologies about it.  

9 users browsing, dropped to 2 while I was there, 1-13 comments on the posts.

Now let me compare that with reddit.com/r/bitcoin.  Comments on posts:

229, 107, 96, 38, 58, 74, 126...no need to continue.  Wait...how many people were browsing the bitcoin threads? 1062!

So, reddit.com/r/climate is a complete objective FAIL.  This thread itself although wide ranging is far more downright interesting that their threads (and this one thread has more comments than all of theirs combined, going way back).  The WHY is interesting.

Because, well....their threads read like propaganda....DULL!!!

http://www.reddit.com/r/climate/

Fascinating to know all those facts about reddit versus my little lonely thread. Thanks.

I would bet that, before the banning, they would have scored much much higher. But who want to see a boxing match with only one dude in a ring?