Left wingers, how does CO2 gas threaten the Earth and universe, if it has always existed?
Please, no weirdos
46-50
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
kayoshin · 41-45, M
The same way fire and radiation "always existed” (no they probably did not, it's most likely that only helium existed at first and more complex atoms were formed inside stars due to fusion) and they are lethal.
I choose not to take this question seriously, because no one old enough to talk politics can't be this uneducated and at the same time have internet access. So I assume trolling.
I choose not to take this question seriously, because no one old enough to talk politics can't be this uneducated and at the same time have internet access. So I assume trolling.
Oldanglaisadverbs · 46-50
@kayoshin What is a troll? here in Europe, mythical creatures
kayoshin · 41-45, M
@Oldanglaisadverbs Here in Europe we are not 1 country. On the internet it's a person that tries to bother people on purpose to entertain themselves and/or inflate some sense of self worth that the real world doesn't give them.
Oldanglaisadverbs · 46-50
@kayoshin Elf
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@kayoshin Hydrogen first, which fuses to helium in the first stage in active stars.
"Radiation" covers a huge spectrum of electromagnetic energy including radio, light and heat, and the ionising wavelengths occupy only the high-frequency end of that spectrum.
Otherwise I largely agree with your point about politics and ignorance.
I do wonder how or why, in a world that relies so more and more heavily on science and engineering, so many people have such poor technical knowledge. I don't mean to deep specialist levels, but at least the broad general technical knowledge we were, or should have been, taught in school science and geography lessons; plus more we picked up as we developed.
Instead, it seems, they fondly imagine that being able to use social-media, and to use words like "algorithm" and "epicentre" without knowing what those mean, makes them technically sophisticated - or "tech savvy" as they might call it.
It doesn't!
"Radiation" covers a huge spectrum of electromagnetic energy including radio, light and heat, and the ionising wavelengths occupy only the high-frequency end of that spectrum.
Otherwise I largely agree with your point about politics and ignorance.
I do wonder how or why, in a world that relies so more and more heavily on science and engineering, so many people have such poor technical knowledge. I don't mean to deep specialist levels, but at least the broad general technical knowledge we were, or should have been, taught in school science and geography lessons; plus more we picked up as we developed.
Instead, it seems, they fondly imagine that being able to use social-media, and to use words like "algorithm" and "epicentre" without knowing what those mean, makes them technically sophisticated - or "tech savvy" as they might call it.
It doesn't!
kayoshin · 41-45, M
@ArishMell thank you for the corrections on the first atom, chemistry was never my forte so I was thinking helium :)
What worries me the most is that it's not old farts like me, but young people that were born with access to information, that choose ignorance and even worse are proud of it and of spreading it like a disease.
What worries me the most is that it's not old farts like me, but young people that were born with access to information, that choose ignorance and even worse are proud of it and of spreading it like a disease.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@kayoshin Thankyou!
I fear you are right about the wilful ignorance.
I first encountered it when hearing "celebrities" boasting and joking about their inability to understand mathematics or, say, physics..
I do share that problem: Maths was perhaps my weakest subject at school, so I would have struggled with advanced physics; but unlike them I regret it, not revel in it. It also put paid to my early dreams of a career as an Engineer or Scientist, though over the years since I have managed to understand some topics at last, decades after being taught them.
I think though there is another factor: the corrosive effects of "celebrity" and [anti?]social-media.
It would be hard to criticise a youngster for thinking there is no point in hard graft to learn anything - technical or indeed artistic - when they see entertainers and the like becoming wealthy by fame inversely proportional to talent; and so-called "influencers" being paid a lot of money merely to read advertising scripts for nothing special.
Also I see too many people as far too gullible for their own good - they will lap up any old anti-knowledge rubbish on-line, however illogical, merely because it is on-line, takes no effort or thought to follow, is anonymous, of unknown origin and supports favoured prejudices or political dogma.
.
Sadly too, even for someone with the talent and will to succeed in advance academia, practical or artistic skills, there is no guarantee of worthwhile employment in the chosen field. Though if you don't try you have no chance, of course!
I fear you are right about the wilful ignorance.
I first encountered it when hearing "celebrities" boasting and joking about their inability to understand mathematics or, say, physics..
I do share that problem: Maths was perhaps my weakest subject at school, so I would have struggled with advanced physics; but unlike them I regret it, not revel in it. It also put paid to my early dreams of a career as an Engineer or Scientist, though over the years since I have managed to understand some topics at last, decades after being taught them.
I think though there is another factor: the corrosive effects of "celebrity" and [anti?]social-media.
It would be hard to criticise a youngster for thinking there is no point in hard graft to learn anything - technical or indeed artistic - when they see entertainers and the like becoming wealthy by fame inversely proportional to talent; and so-called "influencers" being paid a lot of money merely to read advertising scripts for nothing special.
Also I see too many people as far too gullible for their own good - they will lap up any old anti-knowledge rubbish on-line, however illogical, merely because it is on-line, takes no effort or thought to follow, is anonymous, of unknown origin and supports favoured prejudices or political dogma.
.
Sadly too, even for someone with the talent and will to succeed in advance academia, practical or artistic skills, there is no guarantee of worthwhile employment in the chosen field. Though if you don't try you have no chance, of course!