Comments by "Digital Nomad" (@digitalnomad9985) on "Alliance for Responsible Citizenship"
channel.
-
6
-
All of the supposed "peak Christianity" events you cite are well past the peak of Christianity in the Victorian Era except for Dutch slavery which was before it. Protestantism created the modern libertarian west. We (Protestants) ended slavery; implemented religious freedom, political freedom, academic freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of the press FIRST, and thus caused the academic, scientific, technological, and material progress that followed; and most of the rest of the world hasn't caught up with it yet. John 8:32 "You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”
And what do you propose as an alternative? Atheism? That has a singularly abysmal track record. From the Jacobin Reign of Terror in the French Revolution, through the Soviet Union, the Third Reich, Communist China, and the Pol Pot regime; the result of a society based on atheism has invariably been bloodbath after bloodbath. The USSR alone murdered more of its own civilians than have ever been killed in all the inquisitions, pogroms, and purely religious wars in recorded history, and they only lasted: what? 80 or so years?
What you are "expecting" is what has been tried for a century and more and has abysmally failed. This is the point of Ali's speech, and it is far to late in the day to pretend not to see it. Must I quote Einstein's dictum about insanity?
3
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
@StrangeAttractor There is nothing in a body of knowledge that would keep the knower from doing evil. That is why a technocracy is no better than any other oligarchy. Fortunately, we don't need to be scientists to know that when predictions fail they disconfirm the theories that predicted them:
In 1988, James Hansen testified before the US Congress about the dangers of anthropogenic global warming. His advocates in Congress had scheduled the testimony on what was forecast to be the hottest day of that year and sabotaged the House floor air conditioning by opening the windows.
Hansen presented three scenarios of projected future warming from hottest to coolest. Scenario A he called "Business as Usual", assumed carbon emissions increasing on a projection curve of past increase. Scenario B assumed the rate increase of carbon emissions was held at 1988 levels. Scenario C assumed that the level of carbon emissions was held at 1988 levels.
The actual level of carbon emissions was closest to his A scenario, while measured temperatures were below his C scenario. He also claimed that the late '80s and '90s would see "greater than average warming in the southeast U.S. and the Midwest". No such spike has been measured in these regions. This is disconfirmation.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2018/06/22/the-failed-predictions-of-james-hansen/
________________________
According to July 5, 1989, article in the Miami Herald, the then-director of the New York office of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), Noel Brown, warned of a “10-year window of opportunity to solve” global warming. According to the 1989 article, “A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ‘eco-refugees,’ threatening political chaos.” Disconfirmed.
________________________
"(By) 1995, the greenhouse effect would be desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots... (By 1996) The Platte River of Nebraska would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses, and shutdown computers." Micheal Oppenheimer, published in Dead Heat, St. Martin's Press, 1990
Disconfirmed.
_________________________
In 1998, Micheal E. Mann, et. al. published the infamous "hockey stick" graph. It was immediately called into question for being a supposed summary of temperatures for the past thousand years which did not register the Medieval Warming Peroid or the Little Ice age, both attested by history and ice core data. Here the problem is not just the inability to correctly project the future, but a refusal to accurately represent the past. Also, he changed data methodologies on different parts of the graph.
In an attempt to silence his critics, he filed suit against Canadian climatologist Tim Ball and commentator Mark Steyn. Mann faces bankruptcy as a result of counterclaims following the collapse of his suit against Ball. Steyn has also countersued. Mann’s chief undoing in all such lawsuits is highlighted in a quote in Steyn’s latest counterclaim:
“Plaintiff continues to evade the one action that might definitively establish its [his science’s] respectability – by objecting, in the courts of Virginia, British Columbia and elsewhere, to the release of his research in this field. See Cuccinelli vs Rectors and Visitors of the University of Virginia…”
https://principia-scientific.org/michael-mann-faces-bankruptcy-as-his-courtroom-climate-capers-collapse/
Mann's work was at first embraced by the global warming alarmist community, being central to the UNs 3rd Assessment report in 2001. Mann's work has since been dismissed by scientists around the world who subscribe to global warming.
_________________________
Back in 2000, climate scientist David Viner had a very dire prediction for those living in England: Snow was going to become almost extinct there.
In a viral interview with the U.K. Independent, Viner said that snow on the isles was going to be “a very rare and exciting event.”
“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” Viner said. “We’re really going to get caught out. Snow will probably cause chaos in 20 years time.”
Disconfirmed.
1
-
1
-
@geekylove3603
You say this about AHA, who has taken her life into her hands speaking the truth to power and challenging the murderers of her friends and collegues? If you think that conservative content is the path to easy money, you haven't the merest clue about the media landscape. Every conservative spokesman goes into the field knowing he could make many times more hawking the other side. The side underwritten by oodles of well connected billionaire donors. The side that never has to worry about demonitization, cancellation, censorship or subsidized industrial strength slander, harassing litigation, organized subsidized pre-pardoned harassment and outright naked violence, and political prosecution from a lockstep monolithic power bloc of the bureaucratic state, legacy and state sponsored media, the electronic gatekeepers, their shady cynical oligarchs, and their many dupes and henchmen.
It just irks the hell out of you that we work-stained Bob Cratchits in our deplorable masses can glean a ha'pence here, a tu'pence there and have the unmitigated gall to pool our penury and prayers; our blood, sweat, tears, and toil; our individually feeble voices and indomitable goodwill to collectively support a few brave and talented men and women to publish some genteel and diffident criticism against the most powerful corrupt political machine the world has known. "It's not FAIR", sobs the crybully in agony as he lays on the whip. "There oughta be a LAW!!" It never occurred to anyone in the history of mankind to speak the truth to power FOR MONEY, for good and sufficient reason. It's bad for business.
1