Turns out the Aztec Astronomer/Priests were Alarmists Also

[Crick]

Yes, I was assuming that you mispoke.

Misspoke when?

That blanket could also shade me from the sun, or temporarily keep heat out.

Or it could be used to wrap up a dead fish. Give us a fucking break.

And actual greenhouse can keep plants from freezing, just as Earth's greenhouse gases allow enough heat to stay in to allow plants and animals not to freeze. Greenhouse gases: VITAL to life on Earth!

GHGs do not "allow... Heat to stay in". They prevent it from escaping to space. Greenhouse gases certainly are vital. The Earth would be an iceball without them.

Yes, I understood it long before you explained it.

So, either you lied when you pretended not to know it, you lied when you claimed it was an alarmist hoax or you're lying when you claim you knew it all along. Feel free to pick one.

But that was a simple explanation that made sense, keeping in mind all the "if"s. Well done.

I gave no "ifs" to the process; there are none given the way I described it. I gave three possible states for the Earth sun system.

If you can explain that, why can you not explain what you think we should do to lower Earth's temperature, what it will cost, and how much that expendature[sic] will lower the temperature of Earth?

If you can tell us about Aztecs. Why can't you explain acoustic convergence zones?

Is it possible that you understand only the Greenhouse Effect, and that the rest of it you are taking on faith?

Fuck you Seymour

 

[Crick]

The greenhouse is real, but any claims that human activity increases (or decreases) global warming are subject to skepticism, no matter what organization is making that claim.

I identified no organization wrt verifying the human sourcing of CO2 in our air. The IPCC has certainly not done it. The IPCC conducts no science Seymour.

Human causation has been identified by two methods. I am assuming you understand what an isotope is. If that is not the case, let me know. CO2 from ongoing respiratory and other organic processes has a different isotopic ratio than does CO2 originating from fossil fuel. An examination, then, of the isotopic ratio of the CO2 in the atmosphere allows scientists to determine by direct measurement, what portion of the atmosphere's CO2 originated from fossil fuel. When they do that, it shows almost precisely the same amount as that by which CO2 levels have increased since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, when we began using fossil fuels.

The second method is simple bookkeeping. By examination of a variety of records, it is possible to make an accurate estimate of the total quantity of fossil fuels that humans have burned between the beginning of the Industrial Revolution till today. It is then possible to calculate how much CO2 that would produce and then calculate the amount that would end up in our soil, in our waters and in our air. The results of that calculation almost perfectly match the results of the isotopic analysis.

Do you understand how this robustly establishes that the human use of fossil fuels is the source of almost all the CO2 added to the atmosphere since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution?

If you have questions, I would be glad to try to answer them.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I appreciate you put some work into typing and C&Ping all this, but this treatise on the Aztecs has zero to do with AGW, the greenhouse effect or the environment. So, <SNIP>

You must not have read the title of the OP.

My typing and C&Ping was to show you the absurdity of your statements about Aztec civilization, the topic of this thread.

You know the difference between "ignorant" and "stupid?"

An ignorant person doesn't know things.

A stupid person thinks he knows things and insults others who actually do know things. It's a combination of arrogance and ignorance that shows low cognitive ability as well as any test conceived by Alfred Binet.

At least you admit that you know little about AGW, but are merely a link monkey. But your bizarre statements on Aztec government and economy show not only complete ignorance, but arrogance in that ignorance that does add up to stupidity. Not the first time I've noticed it, but this is the first time I have called you stupid, because I wanted to be sure first.

I know you are eager for this exchange with me to continue, but I cannot respond to you about AGW until you have submitted answers to the questions you are behind on.

Meanwhile, you are welcome on this thread, so long as you stick to the OP.

Thanks.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So, much like our own "progressive" politicians, the Aztec government liked to keep its people cowed through frightening apocolyptic predictions.

This from the loyal member of the "brown people are coming for you" party!

 

[Crick]

Do you notice that I answer almost all your questions, but you answer almost none of mine?

I do not answer your rhetorical questions. I rarely respond to your frequent demands for specific information that I have told you I am unable or unqualified to give, though I have given you links to excellent sources for that info which you have completely ignored.

I do not ask you many questions. I actually can't think of any I have asked you.

What I DO notice you doing is asking/demanding information which I have provided on AGW with supporting links. You then speak as if I have never said a word to you. You have done this repeatedly and you have never responded to my complaints about this.

Your initial premise, to say that AGW is an alarmist hoax, calls me a fool or a liar. I can't say that pleases me Seymour.

 

[Seymour Flops]

This from the loyal member of the "brown people are coming for you" party!

The party that never says "brown people are coming for you," you mean?

Or do you not know what quote marks mean?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The party that never says "brown people are coming for you," you mean?

Or do you not know what quote marks mean?

You are a loyal dedicated member of the GOP and their god king Trump, and their whole shtick is the great white replacement fearmongering tactic.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I do not answer your rhetorical questions. I rarely respond to your frequent demands for specific information that I have told you I am unable or unqualified to give, though I have given you links to excellent sources for that info which you have completely ignored.

I do not ask you many questions. I actually can't think of any I have asked you.

What I DO notice you doing is asking/demanding information which I have provided on AGW with supporting links. You then speak as if I have never said a word to you. You have done this repeatedly and you have never responded to my complaints about this.

Nothing in that entire post about Aztecs, Aztec astronomy, nor the analogy between the Aztecs and modern day alarmists.

Go back to the threads you create to show your ignorance about AGW. Here you are welcome to continue to show your ignorance about the Aztecs, if you are a glutton for punishment.

Your initial premise, to say that AGW is an alarmist hoax, calls me a fool or a liar. I can't say that pleases me Seymour.

Waaaaaaaaaah!

 

[Seymour Flops]

You are a loyal dedicated member of the GOP and their god king Trump, and their whole shtick is the great white replacement fearmongering tactic.

Can you provide some quotes from Trump about white replacement?

I post a thread in part honoring the intelligence and accomplishments of a civilization of brown people and stating that my accomplishments are far less than theirs. Your response is to accuse me of hating brown people.

Logic is never the Democrats' long suit.

 

[Crick]

You must not have read the title of the OP.

You must not have read the title of the forum.

My typing and C&Ping was to show you the absurdity of your statements about Aztec civilization, the topic of this thread.

I guess I was acting as if the thread must have been intended to speak about the environment in some fashion. My mistake. And I did correct your misunderstanding of the priests selection of Olin 4 wrt eclipses AND your understanding of the occurrence rate of eclipses AND your claim that AGW is an alarmist hoax AND your claim that I had shown you no evidence that humans are responsible for global warming AND your implicit claim to be speaking honestly when you have lied to us all repeatedly.

You know the difference between "ignorant" and "stupid?"

I have definitions for those terms but I think it exceedingly unlikely that they would match yours.

An ignorant person doesn't know things.

Like you and any hard science.

A stupid person thinks he knows things and insults others who actually do know things.

Like you and your Aztec irrelevancies wrt AGW

It's a combination of arrogance and ignorance that shows low cognitive ability as well as any test conceived by Alfred Binet.

Admirable self-awareness on your part though. Do you have a definition for "liar"?

At least you admit that you know little about AGW, but are merely a link monkey.

You know, someone who would knowingly state a blatant falsehood like that one.

But your bizarre statements on Aztec government and economy show not only complete ignorance, but arrogance in that ignorance that does add up to stupidity.

I am no expert on the Aztecs and I never claimed to be one. I have been to Chichen Itza, Tulum, Coba and maybe Uxmal but looking at the rock piles doesn't tell a layman much about society and culture. Any comments I made were based on limited reading and general historical knowledge. But, isn't this an example of the stupid person insulting others?

Not the first time I've noticed it, but this is the first time I have called you stupid, because I wanted to be sure first.

Then allow me to be second. You're stupid. You know diddly squat about any hard science that I can see yet feel you can reject the work of thousands of real scientists and peer reviewed studies over decades and characterize it all as an alarmist hoax with a political agenda - an accusation for which the only evidence you seem able to present is a flawed rendition of Aztec history.

I know you are eager for this exchange with me to continue, but I cannot respond to you about AGW until you have submitted answers to the questions you are behind on.

I know you are eager for this exchange to end to minimize your continued embarrassment. But I can get really fixated on people that lie about me.

Meanwhile, you are welcome on this thread, so long as you stick to the OP.

If I don't and you actually want to DO something about it, feel free to complain to the moderators.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I post a thread in part honoring the intelligence and accomplishments of a civilization of brown people and stating that my accomplishments are far less than theirs. Your response is to accuse me of hating brown people.

Your post is an attack on civilization of brown people comparing it to your hated enemies the Dems.

When did you become so dishonest, you used to never be this big of a coward and would stand by your post.

Sad.

 

[ReinyDays]

... The Aztecs are known as great builders, mathematicians and astronomers, but the overwhelming majority of Aztecs did farm work, living on a pittance while keeping those builders, mathematicians and astronomers well-paid, well-fed, and well supplied with material and labor.

This was for safety ... you forgot to include the soldier class ... Central Mexico was a dangerous place when the Aztecs got there ... war on all sides ... it was best for the farmers to pay for an army ...

Why did Germany elected Adolph Hitler? ... because Bolsheviks were rampaging over the country murdering people ... and the Nazis promised to fight back ... just like the Aztecs, the Germans had good reason to be afraid ...

 

[Seymour Flops]

You must not have read the title of the forum.

I guess I was acting as if the thread must have been intended to speak about the environment in some fashion. My mistake. And I did correct your misunderstanding of the priests selection of Olin 4 wrt eclipses AND your understanding of the occurrence rate of eclipses AND your claim that AGW is an alarmist hoax AND your claim that I had shown you no evidence that humans are responsible for global warming AND your implicit claim to be speaking honestly when you have lied to us all repeatedly.

I have definitions for those terms but I think it exceedingly unlikely that they would match yours.

Like you and any hard science.

Like you and your Aztec irrelevancies wrt AGW

Admirable self-awareness on your part though. Do you have a definition for "liar"?

You know, someone who would knowingly state a blatant falsehood like that one.

I am no expert on the Aztecs and I never claimed to be one. I have been to Chichen Itza, Tulum, Coba and maybe Uxmal but looking at the rock piles doesn't tell a layman much about society and culture. Any comments I made were based on limited reading and general historical knowledge. But, isn't this an example of the stupid person insulting others?

Then allow me to be second. You're stupid. You know diddly squat about any hard science that I can see yet feel you can reject the work of thousands of real scientists and peer reviewed studies over decades and characterize it all as an alarmist hoax with a political agenda - an accusation for which the only evidence you seem able to present is a flawed rendition of Aztec history.

I know you are eager for this exchange to end to minimize your continued embarrassment. But I can get really fixated on people that lie about me.

If I don't and you actually want to DO something about it, feel free to complain to the moderators.

Still off topic.

Bye, Stupid.

 

[Seymour Flops]

This was for safety ... you forgot to include the soldier class ... Central Mexico was a dangerous place when the Aztecs got there ... war on all sides ... it was best for the farmers to pay for an army ...

No doubt they were to some degree better off with the Aztec Army protecting the King's territory, instead of the warring tribes attacking the farms for food.

But the result was similar, a large part of their work product sacrificed to men at arms. That's the nature of government in general, not confined to Aztecs, of course.

Why did Germany elected Adolph Hitler? ... because Bolsheviks were rampaging over the country murdering people ... and the Nazis promised to fight back ... just like the Aztecs, the Germans had good reason to be afraid ...

Yes, and how did that work out for them?

But yes, people will always prefer to be raped, pillaged, and looted by local boys than those horrid fern'ers.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Your post is an attack on civilization of brown people comparing it to your hated enemies the Dems.

True, but it had nothing to do with them being brown. That was your own obsession.

When did you become so dishonest, you used to never be this big of a coward and would stand by your post.

Sad.

Waaaaaaaaah!

You and your buddy need to hold hands and talk about how "triggered" you are.

 

[ReinyDays]

No doubt they were to some degree better off with the Aztec Army protecting the King's territory, instead of the warring tribes attacking the farms for food.

But the result was similar, a large part of their work product sacrificed to men at arms. That's the nature of government in general, not confined to Aztecs, of course.


Yes, and how did that work out for them?

But yes, people will always prefer to be raped, pillaged, and looted by local boys than those horrid fern'ers.

It's called a social contract ... we pay taxes and hire our own inspectors to check that airplane doors have bolts ... or the doors fly off in mid-air ... do you want the doors on the airplane flying off in mid-air? ...

... because neither Boeing nor Alaska Airlines will check ... that's been proven ... and you folks don't pay enough taxes for the government to check ...

 

[Seymour Flops]

It's called a social contract ... we pay taxes and hire our own inspectors to check that airplane doors have bolts ... or the doors fly off in mid-air ... do you want the doors on the airplane flying off in mid-air? ...

... because neither Boeing nor Alaska Airlines will check ... that's been proven ... and you folks don't pay enough taxes for the government to check ...

As so, often with you, Reiny, you start off well, and then veer into the twilight zone. But there is a certain amount of charm to that.

I’m well aware of the idea of the social contract. It is economics or sociology, 101. However, when it comes to farmers and soldiers of an ancient civilization, it is a totally invalid concept.

The word contract implies voluntary agreement between two roughly equally free parties.
That was rarely if the situation and ancient civilizations. The Aztec farmers were not protected by the Aztec army because they chose the Aztec army over the marauding tribes. The farmers had no choice.

They were ruled/dominated by the Aztec Army because the army defeated those tribes. Had the tribes prevailed in combat, they would be either formally taxing the farmers, or as uncivilized tribes often do simply murdering the farmers and taking all of their produce.

Either way, nobody, and I mean absolutely nobody, Ask the farmers what their preference was. A contract requires consent from both (or all) parties. That is something the left never seems to understand when they keep bringing up the concept of “social contract, mast often to justify taxes.“

 

[Harpy Eagle]

True, but it had nothing to do with them being brown. That was your own obsession.

No, it is your beloved party's obsession

You and your buddy need to hold hands and talk about how "triggered" you are.

Not triggered at all, just stating the facts. I have been on multiple forums with you and it was not until you sold your soul to your beloved party that you became this way.

 

[Seymour Flops]

No, it is your beloved party's obsession



Not triggered at all, just stating the facts. I have been on multiple forums with you and it was not until you sold your soul to your beloved party that you became this way.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzz . . . Uh? . . . oh, sorry.

What were you saying?

 

[ReinyDays]

As so, often with you, Reiny, you start off well, and then veer into the twilight zone. But there is a certain amount of charm to that.

I’m well aware of the idea of the social contract. It is economics or sociology, 101. However, when it comes to farmers and soldiers of an ancient civilization, it is a totally invalid concept.

The word contract implies voluntary agreement between two roughly equally free parties.
That was rarely if the situation and ancient civilizations. The Aztec farmers were not protected by the Aztec army because they chose the Aztec army over the marauding tribes. The farmers had no choice.

They were ruled/dominated by the Aztec Army because the army defeated those tribes. Had the tribes prevailed in combat, they would be either formally taxing the farmers, or as uncivilized tribes often do simply murdering the farmers and taking all of their produce.

Either way, nobody, and I mean absolutely nobody, Ask the farmers what their preference was. A contract requires consent from both (or all) parties. That is something the left never seems to understand when they keep bringing up the concept of “social contract, mast often to justify taxes.“

Are you overlaying European history onto the Aztecs ... because Aztec civilization is contemporary with Henry VIII of England, usually considered the beginning of the Modern Era and the Wars of Religion ...

The other mistake you make is that it was the Aztecs who were the invaders ... their farmers were soldiers ... just like in Europe at the time ... just like some Viking invaders, they brought their families to settle and farm the land ... that's the social contract I'm talking about ... farmers were the soldiers when they were needed to be soldiers ...

The Spanish didn't burn the Aztec civilization down because it was primitive ... they burned it down because is was advanced ... and a threat ... that's just how Catholics are ...