icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 I like Hawking's response to that question: ...like asking what is north of the North Pole. Speaking of Hawking, when recently asked about the greatest threats to humankind, he did not mention global warming. Why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 I like Hawking's response to that question: ...like asking what is north of the North Pole. Speaking of Hawking, when recently asked about the greatest threats to humankind, he did not mention global warming. Why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 I like Hawking's response to that question: ...like asking what is north of the North Pole. Speaking of Hawking, when recently asked about the greatest threats to humankind, he did not mention global warming. Why not? Bump. I was hoping for a serious answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 11,153 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Speaking of Hawking, when recently asked about the greatest threats to humankind, he did not mention global warming. Why not? Odd. He's been very vocal about climate change in the past. You got a link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Artificial Intelligence. That is a honest , accurate reply, reflective of what Dr Hawking said. He also said human aggression and alien life would be possible threats to mankind. LINK AGW wasn't in the top 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Artificial Intelligence. That is a honest , accurate reply, reflective of what Dr Hawking said. He also said human aggression and alien life would be possible threats to mankind. LINK AGW wasn't in the top 3. No. How he answered was not the question. Someone please explain why, if global warming is such a serious problem, why would Hawking not mention it as one of the three biggest threats to humankind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFTiger 282 Posted March 1, 2015 Author Share Posted March 1, 2015 How would Hawkins feel if he were investigated by some dufus congressman because of his theories? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 How would Hawkins feel if he were investigated by some dufus congressman because of his theories? Who is Hawkins and why are his feelings relevant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Artificial Intelligence. That is a honest , accurate reply, reflective of what Dr Hawking said. He also said human aggression and alien life would be possible threats to mankind. LINK AGW wasn't in the top 3. No. How he answered was not the question. Someone please explain why, if global warming is such a serious problem, why would Hawking not mention it as one of the three biggest threats to humankind? My reply had nothing to do w/ " how " anything. It was " WHAT " he answered. Your question was this - " Speaking of Hawking, when recently asked about the greatest threats to humankind, he did not mention global warming. Why not? " I gave the top 3 items which Hawking thought were a threat to human kind. Stop trolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Artificial Intelligence. That is a honest , accurate reply, reflective of what Dr Hawking said. He also said human aggression and alien life would be possible threats to mankind. LINK AGW wasn't in the top 3. No. How he answered was not the question. Someone please explain why, if global warming is such a serious problem, why would Hawking not mention it as one of the three biggest threats to humankind? My reply had nothing to do w/ " how " anything. It was " WHAT " he answered. Your question was this - " Speaking of Hawking, when recently asked about the greatest threats to humankind, he did not mention global warming. Why not? " I gave the top 3 items which Hawking thought were a threat to human kind. Stop trolling. You obviously can not understand the question. Thank you for trying though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 You obviously can't formulate a coherent question to ask. " Speaking of Hawking, when recently asked about the greatest threats to humankind, he did not mention global warming. Why not? " This is what you asked. Not too hard to decipher. I answered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 You obviously can't formulate a coherent question to ask. " Speaking of Hawking, when recently asked about the greatest threats to humankind, he did not mention global warming. Why not? " This is what you asked. Not too hard to decipher. I answered. Okay, okay. You understood my question. I did not. Thank you very, very much. Now, can someone (probably someone who supports the global warming theory) speculate as to why Hawking, someone with the ability to understand complex data and scientific concepts, fail to recognize global warming as one of the top three concerns for mankind? Someone, anyone not named Raptor? TIA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 I'd actually like to see someone answer that question as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,385 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 http://www.rtcc.org/...-70th-birthday/ "As cosmologist Stephen Hawking celebrates his 70th birthday he warns that climate change is one of a greatest threats posed to the future of human-kind and the world." .........He said: “It is possible that the human race could become extinct but it is not inevitable. I think it is almost certain that a disaster, such as nuclear war or global warming will befall the earth within a thousand years.” ..........“As we stand at the brink of a second nuclear age and a period of unprecedented climate change, scientists have a special responsibility, once again to inform the public and to advise leaders about the perils that humanity faces,” he said. “As scientists we understand the dangers of nuclear weapons and their devastation effects, and we are learning how human activities and technologies are affecting climate systems in ways that may forever change life on Earth. “As citizens of the world, we have a duty to share that knowledge. We have a duty.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFTiger 282 Posted March 1, 2015 Author Share Posted March 1, 2015 So the green machine refuses to answer the question. The thread was not about Stephen Hawking or even global warming. The question is should politicians interfere with science research? Homer, Homer, ICHY,------- anybody? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,385 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 So the green machine refuses to answer the question. The thread was not about Stephen Hawking or even global warming. The question is should politicians interfere with science research? Homer, Homer, ICHY,------- anybody? First, Raptor is the one asking about Hawking's view on AGW as a threat. No. Politicians should not interfere with climate research. What is the "green machine"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 So the green machine refuses to answer the question. The thread was not about Stephen Hawking or even global warming. The question is should politicians interfere with science research? Homer, Homer, ICHY,------- anybody? First, Raptor is the one asking about Hawking's view on AGW as a threat. No. Politicians should not interfere with climate research. What is the "green machine"? Actually I was but, you know,,,,,,,,,,,,,, me, Raptor, same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,385 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 So the green machine refuses to answer the question. The thread was not about Stephen Hawking or even global warming. The question is should politicians interfere with science research? Homer, Homer, ICHY,------- anybody? First, Raptor is the one asking about Hawking's view on AGW as a threat. No. Politicians should not interfere with climate research. What is the "green machine"? Actually I was but, you know,,,,,,,,,,,,,, me, Raptor, same thing. Well, I was responding to Raptor. I figured you could look it up on your own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 So the green machine refuses to answer the question. The thread was not about Stephen Hawking or even global warming. The question is should politicians interfere with science research? Homer, Homer, ICHY,------- anybody? First, Raptor is the one asking about Hawking's view on AGW as a threat. No. Politicians should not interfere with climate research. What is the "green machine"? Actually I was but, you know,,,,,,,,,,,,,, me, Raptor, same thing. Well, I was responding to Raptor. I figured you could look it up on your own. Hey, don't give me more credit than I deserve. And, I don't do anything that I can get Stry or Big to do for me. I think Big is on to me though. That or he put me on ignore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,426 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 March 8, 2007 Roy Spencer appeared on the The Great Global Warming Swindle to talk about the “Great Science Funding Conspiracy.” Spencer claims that “climate scientists need there to be a problem in order to get funding.” Swindle received critical response from the scientific community, including a letter addressed to ABC signed by thirty-seven British Scientists that claimed “the misrepresentations of facts and views, both of which occur in your programme, are so serious that repeat broadcasts of the programme, without amendment, are not in the public interest. In view of the seriousness of climate change as an issue, it is crucial that public debate about it is balanced and well-informed.” ABC Australia’s Tony Jones also brings the film's scientific accuracy into question in an interview with the film’s director, Martin Durkin. Many of these guys got funding back in the late 70s and early 80s by creating The Coming Ice Age Crisis. Yes, i and many more can plainly see that whatever the crisis du jour is, that is right where SOME of these guys will be with their hands out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I'd actually like to see someone answer that question as well. I told you it was a good question. And still, no good answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,426 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I'd actually like to see someone answer that question as well. Count me in as well. Here, let me help:"If he names the Top Three World Challenges and doesnt mention AGW, then we can conclude..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 11,153 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 So the green machine refuses to answer the question. The thread was not about Stephen Hawking or even global warming. The question is should politicians interfere with science research? Homer, Homer, ICHY,------- anybody? First, Raptor is the one asking about Hawking's view on AGW as a threat. No. Politicians should not interfere with climate research. What is the "green machine"? Actually I was but, you know,,,,,,,,,,,,,, me, Raptor, same thing. Well, I was responding to Raptor. I figured you could look it up on your own. Hey, don't give me more credit than I deserve. And, I don't do anything that I can get Stry or Big to do for me. I think Big is on to me though. That or he put me on ignore. Been struggling with a plumbing disaster all day. How do you break connection between the copper pipe and the shutoff valve to the toilet, you may ask? My 9 year old can now answer. Water everywhere. One plus, though. I have now learned how to sweat pipe. Easier than I expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,426 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 What was before the big bang? You see there are two differing opinions here. 1) A Miracle occurs at creation and voila' we have the Universe. Call that Creationism. 2) Then you have the Evolutionists view, that basically says, First, A MIRACLE HAPPENS and all this matter appears out of absolute nothing via a Big Bang Episode where Sheldon calls Penny stupid or something and voila' it completely randomly aligns itself into the complicated forms of aminos strings complete with just the cosmically complicated levels of 230+ enzymes in exactly the correct ratios and then the pixie dust comes along and all manages to somehow JUST happen to create life. Hope i got all that right. But, basically, the miracle happens in the beginning or in the middle or somewhere. There is a reason why this is all called theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 11,153 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 What was before the big bang? You see there are two differing opinions here. 1) A Miracle occurs at creation and voila' we have the Universe. Call that Creationism. 2) Then you have the Evolutionists view, that basically says, First, A MIRACLE HAPPENS and all this matter appears out of absolute nothing and voila' it completely randomly aligns itself into the complicated forms of aminos strings complete with just the cosmically complicated levels of 230+ enzymes in exactly the correct ratios and then the pixie dust comes along and all manages to somehow JUST happen to create life. Hope i got all that right. But, basically, the miracle happens in the beginning or in the middle or somewhere. There is a reason why this is all called theory. No. You didn't get it right. Nothing in the above passage makes any sense at all, and you should feel bad for having typed it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.