Here’s a thought: what if we decided to help ‘the indoctrinated’? At what point does this become pathological?
Comment on Pathological altruism by Sparkicle
↧
↧
Comment on Pathological altruism by Kip Hansen
The story of George Price — endearing and instructive as it is — tells us nothing about Altruism as a practice or a virtue. It is a fine one-off example of practical Pathological Altruism — but, as such, should not be used as any kind of proof of concept or bludgeon against true altruism.
Price, more than likely, was what we would today classify as emotionally disturbed — and engaged, and persisted, in a cause, an activity, that was destructive to himself despite the obvious ongoing practical evidence that it was ruining his life and his ability to continue in the practice. It might be classified today as “an addictive destructive behavior”.
My wife and I spent years in the Dominican Republic heading up an altruistic Humanitarian effort, very carefully crafted and constrained by policies to prevent it from becoming Pathologically Altruistic. Not as easy as one would think. We were often tempted to step outside the box created over many years of practical experience, but every time we approached that point, thinking through to the long term effects brought us back to our senses.
Here at Climate Etc. I would encourage readers to look at how PA affects the *ongoing research* into climate and its future.
↧
Comment on Pathological altruism by bob droege
No, none of that.
We climate altruists only want a fair price to be paid for the abundance you receive from fossil fuel use. Since we use fossil fuels, but we don;t pay for the damage the fossil fuels will cause to all of humanity, it is only fair to exact a fair price for such use.
Can you defend the burning of coal to support you lavish lifestyle?
Why don’t we stop calling it affordable fossil fuel when you really mean coal?
↧
Comment on Pathological altruism by Barnes
They sacrificed their credibility.
↧
Comment on Pathological altruism by Jim Cripwell
Bob, Thanks for the compliment. However, what I write is quite unimportant. What our hostess writes matters a great deal more. So, I think following what Judith has written over the years that CE has existed, is much more informative than what anyone else has written.
↧
↧
Comment on Pathological altruism by DayHay
Pathological altruism – when I need YOUR money for MY cause, regardless of any specific benefit or performance requirement
↧
Comment on Public engagement and communicating uncertainty by Chief Hydrologist
Testing…testing…moderation?
↧
Comment on Public engagement and communicating uncertainty by Chief Hydrologist
The 2013 EIA data costs plants coming on line in 2018. Long term assumptions about regulations are irrelevant.
↧
Comment on Hearing: A Factual Look at the Relationship Between Climate and Weather by Mike Flynn
Lolwot,
Interesting observation for those who claim that the atmosphere cannot be experimented upon.
It appears Nature has done it for you. Parts of Antarctica experience surface temperatures of around -90C. The atmosphere above cools with increasing altitude. Now, CO2 freezes at around -80C. Therefore, all CO2 in the atmosphere is frozen into solid CO2, and it is known that the properties of solid CO2 are markedly different from the gaseous form. For example, if solid CO2 absorbs sufficient radiation of any wavelength (IR included), it will become gaseous again. But it doesn’t, it stubbornly remains below its freezing point.
The inference can be drawn that removal of gaseous CO2 from the atmosphere (absolutely guaranteed at temperatures below the freezing point of the gas) should result in a precipitous lowering of temperature by another 33C, if I comprehend the Warmist nonsense accurately – GHE and all that!
Alas, no such precipitous temperature drop occurs. In other words, the presence of gaseous CO2 in the atmosphere will occur only after the temperature rises enough for the solid to sublime to the gaseous state.
Nature has removed gaseous CO2 from the atmosphere. Observe what happens – nothing.
Live well and prosper,
Mike Flynn.
↧
↧
Comment on Hearing: A Factual Look at the Relationship Between Climate and Weather by maksimovich
you could examine the vostok ice record then compare it to the 50yr instrumental record,the later being problematic in their being a zero trend.
↧
Comment on Hearing: A Factual Look at the Relationship Between Climate and Weather by GaryM
It took until the 8 minute mark of the video to get to “deniers” and “for the children”. And if you last until about 10 minutes in you get the climate stylings of George Clooney.
↧
Comment on Hearing: A Factual Look at the Relationship Between Climate and Weather by Chuck L
“Let’s hope President Obama is aware of this, so he can re-focus his “war on carbon” to something more useful.”
If only, Max. Global warming, climate change, war on carbon, etc. are emblematic for liberals/progressives or alarmists, of the excesses of the West, their self-loathing, their assumed moral superiority and ultimately, sense of guilt. I can only hope that science and data win the day at some point.
↧
Comment on Hearing: A Factual Look at the Relationship Between Climate and Weather by ordvic
pokerguy,
Do you know who Avi Gilburt is?
↧
↧
Comment on Hearing: A Factual Look at the Relationship Between Climate and Weather by GaryM
I didn’t say the MWP was too small. I asked where it was, given that I thought it was released from the climate gulag not so long ago. That graph makes it look like its still cooling its heels in “scientific” Siberia.
↧
Comment on Hearing: A Factual Look at the Relationship Between Climate and Weather by Beth Cooper
Skeptics aren’t easily mpressed fan. That’s why they don’t
fall in a heap o-//o-// regardin’ apocalypse now …if not,
next week!
↧
Comment on Hearing: A Factual Look at the Relationship Between Climate and Weather by willard (@nevaudit)
> Nothing good would come from her answering that question.
Then nothing good can come from any claim which presupposes it, however vacuous it may be.
***
> go yap at them.
Only if Judy thinks the best Democrat is an Independent. And even then, why not Gavin, his dishonesty notwithstanding?
↧
Comment on Hearing: A Factual Look at the Relationship Between Climate and Weather by John Carpenter
“No-one has the slightest idea what the value of the climate sensitivity of CO2 is, however this is defined.”
That is not correct. We do have, at the very least, a slight idea what the value of CS of CO2 is. To not have the slightest idea would mean the value could range from + to – infinity. That isn’t likely. I can narrow it down to + or – 15 C pretty confidently. I can reasonably narrow it down to + 6 to 0 C. Through calculation I can get an idea of +4.5 to + 1.5. Heh, even you have an idea of the value of CS to be 0. Further, you are quite confident about that value, which is at least one person having at least a slight idea.
↧
↧
Comment on Hearing: A Factual Look at the Relationship Between Climate and Weather by ordvic
I liked all three testimony summaries that I read here. i find Roger Pielke Jr to be a very effective communicator. He is very direct and understandable and seems to stick to the facts no emotional diatribes. I actually liked Tiltley’s analogy and the general thrust of his testimony which is to say we don’t know enough yet to count or discount it.
↧
Comment on Hearing: A Factual Look at the Relationship Between Climate and Weather by willard (@nevaudit)
> Let’s hope President Obama is aware of this, so he can re-focus his “war on carbon” to something more useful.
Indeed, like memorizing unemployment rates:
Paul, Dec. 8: When you allow people to be on unemployment insurance for 99 weeks, you’re causing them to become part of this perpetual unemployed group in our economy. And it really — while it seems good, it actually does a disservice to the people you’re trying to help.
You know, I don’t doubt the president’s motives. But black unemployment in America is double white unemployment. And it hasn’t budged under this president.
Wallace: But, senator –
Paul: I think a lot of African Americans voted for him, but I don’t think it’s worked. I don’t think his policies have worked.
It is true that the black unemployment rate for November was double the white unemployment rate. The rate in November was 12.5% for blacks and 6.2% for whites, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Unfortunately, this is not new. In a February 2010 article in the Population Association of America journal Demography, authors Kenneth Couch and Robert Fairlie wrote that “[t]he unemployment rate among blacks in the United States has been roughly double that of whites for several decades.”
Obama’s legacy will be far-reaching. Several decades in its past.
↧
Comment on Open thread by willard (@nevaudit)
@andrewadams99 Kim Cobb, @coralsncaves, GT faculty under @curryja: “That is settled science” youtube.com/watch?v=1z44kx… @nevaudit @theresphysics—
Webb Roberts (@webbr) December 11, 2013
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
