A Though Experiment

[ron4342]

Here is a thought experiment for you. Einstein used to do these all the time. He would think of a set of conditions and then ask himself what those conditions would lead to. For example, time was once considered to be the universal constant. That means that time passes at the same rate for all people regardless of where you are in the universe and that there is nothing anyone can do to make it move faster or slower. Einstien asked himself what would happen if time were not the universal constant. What would happen if light were the universal constant. From that simple idea he developed the The Theory of Relativity.

Now, suppose you are in a boat that is in the middle of the ocean. Suppose also that there are 5 other people in the boat with you. And finally, suppose the boat is sinking. You can sit there like the other 5 people doing nothing and in short order the boat sinks and all six of you die or you can ignore what the other 5 people are doing and try to bail out the boat. Now if you choose to do nothing your fate is settled but if you choose to bail out the boat it may still sink but it will stay afloat longer. Plus, there is always the chance that 1 or more of the five will join in and start bailing. WHAT CHOICE ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE AND WHY?

Now think about this in terms of green house gases and global warming.

Watching the climate change deniers dance around this should be fun. Be on the lookout for those who can add nothing to the debate telling me how stupid I am or cursing me. Those are the ones with the low two digit IQ's)

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Here is a thought experiment for you. Einstein used to do these all the time. He would think of a set of conditions and then ask himself what those conditions would lead to. For example, time was once considered to be the universal constant. That means that time passes at the same rate for all people regardless of where you are in the universe. Einstien asked himself what would happen if time were not the universal constant. What would happen if light were the universal constant. From that simple idea he developed the The Theory of Relativity.

Now, suppose you are in a boat that is in the middle of the ocean. Suppose also that there are 5 other people in the boat with you. And finally, suppose the boat is sinking. You can sit there like the other 5 people doing nothing and in short order the boat sinks and all six of you die or you can ignore what the other 5 people are doing and try to bail out the boat. Now if you choose to do nothing your fate is settled but if you choose to bail out the boat it may still sink but it will stay afloat longer. Plus, there is always the chance that 1 or more of the five will join in and start bailing. WHAT CHOICE ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE AND WHY?

Now think about this in terms of green house gases and global warming.

Watching the climate change deniers dance around this should be fun. Be on the lookout for those who can add nothing to the debate telling me how stupid I am or cursing me. Those are the ones with the low two digit IQ's)

Bail but acknowledge, openly and honestly, that you're fucked since most of the the others will admit that the boat is sinking, after it sunk.

 

[ron4342]

Here is a thought experiment for you. Einstein used to do these all the time. He would think of a set of conditions and then ask himself what those conditions would lead to. For example, time was once considered to be the universal constant. That means that time passes at the same rate for all people regardless of where you are in the universe. Einstien asked himself what would happen if time were not the universal constant. What would happen if light were the universal constant. From that simple idea he developed the The Theory of Relativity.

Now, suppose you are in a boat that is in the middle of the ocean. Suppose also that there are 5 other people in the boat with you. And finally, suppose the boat is sinking. You can sit there like the other 5 people doing nothing and in short order the boat sinks and all six of you die or you can ignore what the other 5 people are doing and try to bail out the boat. Now if you choose to do nothing your fate is settled but if you choose to bail out the boat it may still sink but it will stay afloat longer. Plus, there is always the chance that 1 or more of the five will join in and start bailing. WHAT CHOICE ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE AND WHY?

Now think about this in terms of green house gases and global warming.

Watching the climate change deniers dance around this should be fun. Be on the lookout for those who can add nothing to the debate telling me how stupid I am or cursing me. Those are the ones with the low two digit IQ's)

Bail but acknowledge, openly and honestly, that you're fucked since most of the the others will admit that the boat is sinking, after it sunk.

Awwwwww, but maybe it won't sink. Maybe that extra time may give you a chance to repair the boat. Or, as I noted, maybe the others will decide to help you bail.

 

[Katzndogz]

The premise has to be real. The idea of a boat supposes a real boat and real people. A better comparison to global warming would be what would you do if you woke up and a unicorn was standing at the foot of your bed?

 

[FJO]

If all those "scientists" who have that totally amazing 90+% consensus (eerily similar to that equally well educated and scientific and smart and politically correct 90+% black voting for Obama and Democrat) had any integrity and forget the old adage "publish or perish" and concentrated on research and develop methods for clean burning hydro carbons, and if they had the courage to be just as judgemental about China as they are about America, this entire topic of climate change would not even be an issue.

Wasn't New Ice Age and inevitable hunger within 10 years "settled science" in the 1970's?

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Lifeboat ethics fallacy.

Lifeboat ethics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

OP Fail!

[/thread]

 

[DriftingSand]

Here is a thought experiment for you. Einstein used to do these all the time. He would think of a set of conditions and then ask himself what those conditions would lead to. For example, time was once considered to be the universal constant. That means that time passes at the same rate for all people regardless of where you are in the universe and that there is nothing anyone can do to make it move faster or slower. Einstien asked himself what would happen if time were not the universal constant. What would happen if light were the universal constant. From that simple idea he developed the The Theory of Relativity.

Now, suppose you are in a boat that is in the middle of the ocean. Suppose also that there are 5 other people in the boat with you. And finally, suppose the boat is sinking. You can sit there like the other 5 people doing nothing and in short order the boat sinks and all six of you die or you can ignore what the other 5 people are doing and try to bail out the boat. Now if you choose to do nothing your fate is settled but if you choose to bail out the boat it may still sink but it will stay afloat longer. Plus, there is always the chance that 1 or more of the five will join in and start bailing. WHAT CHOICE ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE AND WHY?

Now think about this in terms of green house gases and global warming.

Watching the climate change deniers dance around this should be fun. Be on the lookout for those who can add nothing to the debate telling me how stupid I am or cursing me. Those are the ones with the low two digit IQ's)

Fill the motor with fuel; turn on the motor; and start heading for the closest island as fast as I can. When I get there, I use the fuel from the motor to start a fire then have a fish fry.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The premise has to be real. The idea of a boat supposes a real boat and real people. A better comparison to global warming would be what would you do if you woke up and a unicorn was standing at the foot of your bed?

I wouldn't lie about it because the Bible or Sarah Palin told me it wasn't real.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

The premise has to be real. The idea of a boat supposes a real boat and real people. A better comparison to global warming would be what would you do if you woke up and a unicorn was standing at the foot of your bed?

I wouldn't lie about it because the Bible or Sarah Palin told me it wasn't real.

Straw men in the lifeboat.

Fail on top of fail

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The premise has to be real. The idea of a boat supposes a real boat and real people. A better comparison to global warming would be what would you do if you woke up and a unicorn was standing at the foot of your bed?

I wouldn't lie about it because the Bible or Sarah Palin told me it wasn't real.

Straw men in the lifeboat.

Fail on top of fail

Nothing straw-man about it Sweetcheeks. Sometimes you have to figure out which one do we eat first? That's life on this rock.

 

[hipeter924]

Now, suppose you are in a boat that is in the middle of the ocean.

Generally boats are always in water, and the middle of which ocean, as some are shallow, others are so stormy and if you get stuck in them you are screwed no matter what.

Suppose also that there are 5 other people in the boat with you.

So there are no trained staff on hand to deal with emergencies, and no emergency equipment. Some company is just waiting for a lawsuit, for breaking lots of maritime regulations.

And finally, suppose the boat is sinking.

Life-rafts, life-vests, a radio maybe? I would never go on a boat without those at least.

You can sit there like the other 5 people doing nothing and in short order the boat sinks and all six of you die or you can ignore what the other 5 people are doing and try to bail out the boat.

I don't know about this idea, no one would just sit in a boat and do nothing, till they die - if they do, maybe this is natural selection at work.

Now if you choose to do nothing your fate is settled but if you choose to bail out the boat it may still sink but it will stay afloat longer.

Makes more sense to stay on a boat, as long as it is afloat and conserve energy. Then make a swim for it.

Plus, there is always the chance that 1 or more of the five will join in and start bailing.

Unless you are injured, this really shouldn't make a bit of difference.

WHAT CHOICE ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE AND WHY?

Stay on the boat to conserve energy, try to make an estimate of the weather and the swimming conditions and the distance to land. Would make a swim for it, when the ship actually sinks.

 

[Paperman299]

The premise has to be real. The idea of a boat supposes a real boat and real people. A better comparison to global warming would be what would you do if you woke up and a unicorn was standing at the foot of your bed?

The important thing would be not to let any unicorn deniers (probably funded by McDonald's and Burger King, to really complete the metaphor) convince me that delicious mythological meat wasn't right in front of me, or else I'd miss out on a meal I'd be telling my grandkids about.

 

[hipeter924]

The premise has to be real. The idea of a boat supposes a real boat and real people. A better comparison to global warming would be what would you do if you woke up and a unicorn was standing at the foot of your bed?

The important thing would be not to let any unicorn deniers (probably funded by McDonald's and Burger King, to really complete the metaphor) convince me that delicious mythological meat wasn't right in front of me, or else I'd miss out on a meal I'd be telling my grandkids about.

 

[mamooth]

As this thread illustrates, thought experiments are useless with deniers, being a though experiment requires one be capable of thinking.

Though experiments also require honest subjects who won't squirm and weasel away from any topic that challenges them, which also disqualifies deniers.

I imagine that was actually the point of the OP, to bait the deniers into putting their moral and intellectual deficiencies on display. In that, it definitely succeeded.

 

[flacaltenn]

Here is a thought experiment for you. Einstein used to do these all the time. He would think of a set of conditions and then ask himself what those conditions would lead to. For example, time was once considered to be the universal constant. That means that time passes at the same rate for all people regardless of where you are in the universe and that there is nothing anyone can do to make it move faster or slower. Einstien asked himself what would happen if time were not the universal constant. What would happen if light were the universal constant. From that simple idea he developed the The Theory of Relativity.

Now, suppose you are in a boat that is in the middle of the ocean. Suppose also that there are 5 other people in the boat with you. And finally, suppose the boat is sinking. You can sit there like the other 5 people doing nothing and in short order the boat sinks and all six of you die or you can ignore what the other 5 people are doing and try to bail out the boat. Now if you choose to do nothing your fate is settled but if you choose to bail out the boat it may still sink but it will stay afloat longer. Plus, there is always the chance that 1 or more of the five will join in and start bailing. WHAT CHOICE ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE AND WHY?

Now think about this in terms of green house gases and global warming.

Watching the climate change deniers dance around this should be fun. Be on the lookout for those who can add nothing to the debate telling me how stupid I am or cursing me. Those are the ones with the low two digit IQ's)

I suppose Einstein might view the empirical evidence and conclude that the panicked one is a hypocondriac if water is only 5 feet deep and you havent yet left the dock...

I dont blame you for panicking. The fear mongering is epic..., Knowledge is your best defense. Not invocating Einstein......

 

[Crick]

BTW, Einstein did not come up with special relativity from a thought experiment as the lead post suggests. That the speed of light was a constant regardless of reference frame had been established by Michelson and Morley orbital measurements and Maxwell's contention that light was an electromagnetic phenomenon and its velocity was determined by the Weber/Rohlrausch ratio (in which the reference frame did not appear). It was the independence of light's velocity to reference frame that led Einstein to the realization that the rate of time's passage was dependent on the relative motion of the reference frames of the participants.

Picture a clock consisting of nothing but a photon bouncing between two perfect mirrors. Place the clock on a train and drive the train through a station where observers can watch the clock pass by. Those on the train with the clock will see the photon bouncing straight up and down; its path equal to the spacing between the mirrors. Those in the station will see the photon bouncing from the clock's mirrors as they move through the station: the photon will have a sawtooth path with a greater distance between reflections. Since the velocity of the photon is the same in both reference frames, the passage of time must be different between the two. Time runs slower for the people on the train than it does for the people in the station.