Talkrational Forum

Discussion => Alternative Reality Science Extravaganza => Topic started by: Dave Hawkins on June 12, 2016, 04:19:19 AM

Title: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 12, 2016, 04:19:19 AM
According to you guys, the Sahara at least - and presumably other deserts - will green up naturally given a shift in natural weather patterns.  In fact, you believe that the Sahara has undergone 200+ GSPs (lol) over the past umpteen million years.  Okey dokey. 

My question is ...

Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?

Or is this "deserts will green up naturally" just another piece of wild speculation dressed up in sciency language?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 12, 2016, 04:23:04 AM

Yes, there "any deserts presently greening naturally".

I posted lots of links to Ethiopian deserts that greened naturally when grazing was stopped.

However, in general, global warming means that deserts are currently getting dryer, not wetter. You'd expect deserts to green when humidity increases not when it is reducing.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 12, 2016, 05:50:24 AM
Based on personal experience, house plants die if you do not water them.

But you think that that is absolute nonsense, right?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 12, 2016, 05:53:37 AM
According to you guys, the Sahara at least - and presumably other deserts - will green up naturally given a shift in natural weather patterns.  In fact, you believe that the Sahara has undergone 200+ GSPs (lol) over the past umpteen million years.  Okey dokey. 

My question is ...

Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?

Or is this "deserts will green up naturally" just another piece of wild speculation dressed up in sciency language?
You are contending that
Quote
the Sahara has undergone 200+ GSPs (lol) over the past umpteen million years.
is a loll-able  "wild speculation", based on no evidence?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 12, 2016, 06:23:48 AM
There's some reason to believe the Sahara is greening up, both experimental and theoretical.  I can't figure out which is the appropriate paper, but...


Sahara Desert Greening Due to Climate Change? (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/07/090731-green-sahara.html)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 12, 2016, 06:27:20 AM
re there any deserts presently greening naturally?

Or is this "deserts will green up naturally" just another piece of wild speculation dressed up in sciency language?
Good ol' fallacy of the excluded middle.

Ther are other possibilities.

E.g. maybe no desert is getting wetter right now.
Or maybe some deserts are stable and some are getting drier.

Or any of many other possibilities.

None of which affect the reality that the Sahara has gone through many cycles of wet-dry-wet-dry. Based on lots of evidence.

As you did in another thread at TR, you are asking for the same result as in the past from the processes that operated then and now.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 12, 2016, 09:02:55 AM

Yes, there "any deserts presently greening naturally".

I posted lots of links to Ethiopian deserts that greened naturally when grazing was stopped.

However, in general, global warming means that deserts are currently getting dryer, not wetter. You'd expect deserts to green when humidity increases not when it is reducing.
Let me ask it this way ... You've seen the current Google Earth world maps showing deserts all over the world.

What do you think that Google Earth map would look like 4000 years ago? I think there would be hardly any desert areas at all ... Maybe none. How about you? What's your guess? How would you go about making an educated guess?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 12, 2016, 09:15:24 AM

Yes, there "any deserts presently greening naturally".

I posted lots of links to Ethiopian deserts that greened naturally when grazing was stopped.

However, in general, global warming means that deserts are currently getting dryer, not wetter. You'd expect deserts to green when humidity increases not when it is reducing.
Let me ask it this way ... You've seen the current Google Earth world maps showing deserts all over the world.

What do you think that Google Earth map would look like 4000 years ago? I think there would be hardly any desert areas at all ... Maybe none. How about you? What's your guess? How would you go about making an educated guess?
You ask a lot of questions.
But you don't answer many.
I suggest nobody answer your questions here till you answer this one from the thread you badgered off from:

Too bad the TR archives are lost.
There were countless examples there that support my analysis.
Kalksjon would be a perfect example.

But let's look at this thread.
Have you recognized any "valid objections" to your "idea" that the Sahara desert was man-made?

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 12, 2016, 09:17:44 AM
I wouldn't make an "educated guess".  I would try to find out what is known about the history of the extent of desert regions.

And what does seem to be known with reasonable certainty is that from 11,000-5,000 years ago, the Saharan region was going through a humid period, and much more of it was green than is today.  For the last 5,000 years, the region has got drier, and the desert ecosystem has spread.

I don't know about other deserts, but there is probably research on them if you look, and they too are likely to have fluctuated between more and less humid periods as global climate has oscillated.

And we know it has oscillated from many sources, one of which is Antarctic ice cores.  We know that glacial periods, of which the last Ice Age was one, have recurred at regular intervals of time.

You don't know this, of course, because you refuse to learn anything that points to a conclusion you don't like.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 12, 2016, 09:19:42 AM
Dave, what is the point of you asking Pingu those questions? She's told you about the multiple wet and dry periods in the Sahara, but you close your eyes on the clear evidence that she's speaking truthfully based on clear science. Science you dismiss because it requires an old earth. Any answer she offers will be meaningless to you, because in your world, pollen doesn't fall every single year, varves don't tell the truth, ice cores lie, etc.

Every single other contributor to your threads is convinced by the straightforward indisputable evidence from many sources that the earth is old, that the climate has shifted back and forth over the ages, that the Sahara has cycled through wet and dry.

Global climate is shifting again, whether you think it's caused by human activity or not, it is clearly changing. The evidence in the Arctic alone is indisputable, melting permafrost, lost sea ice, boreal flora and fauna shifting northward. Those things are happening right now, they are visibly measurable right now.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 12, 2016, 10:00:30 AM
I am not interested - in this thread - in what happened more than 4000 years ago.

My question pertains to the last 4000 years. I have given you evidence that a pastoral society existed in SE Algeria up until about 1000 BC.

So 4000 years ago, the area that is now the Sahara was probably pretty dang green. 

Why wouldn't other (present day) deserts be green back then too?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 12, 2016, 10:05:23 AM
I am not interested - in this thread - in what happened more than 4000 years ago.

My question pertains to the last 4000 years. I have given you evidence that a pastoral society existed in SE Algeria up until about 1000 BC.

So 4000 years ago, the area that is now the Sahara was probably pretty dang green. 

Why wouldn't other (present day) deserts be green back then too?
What would be the point of anyone engaging with you in this if, after all the perfectly valid objections people gave you to your proposition that the Sahara desert was man-made, you don't recognize a single one?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 12, 2016, 10:16:00 AM
Probably no point at all for you because you don't seem interested in the topic
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 12, 2016, 10:20:07 AM
Probably no point at all for you because you don't seem interested in the topic
I'm interested enough in the topic to have read Marq de Villier's book on the subject.
You - apparently have never read a single book on it.
You seem to confuse "dismissing Dave Hawkins's uninformed notions on X" with "not interested in X".

But you dodged the question:

What is the point of ANYONE engaging with you in this if, after all the perfectly valid objections people gave you to your proposition that the Sahara desert was man-made, you don't recognize a single one?

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 12, 2016, 10:21:47 AM
As for the Sahara, what objections were raised that the (most recent) drying of the Sahara was not caused by man?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 12, 2016, 10:24:52 AM
As for the Sahara, what objections were raised that the (most recent) drying of the Sahara was not caused by man?
So I was right:

Not only do you not recognize a single objection as "valid"
you don't even remember a single objection of any sort being raised.

So - again - what would be the point of engaging with someone who doesn't even register the response?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 12, 2016, 10:38:16 AM

Yes, there "any deserts presently greening naturally".

I posted lots of links to Ethiopian deserts that greened naturally when grazing was stopped.

However, in general, global warming means that deserts are currently getting dryer, not wetter. You'd expect deserts to green when humidity increases not when it is reducing.
Let me ask it this way ... You've seen the current Google Earth world maps showing deserts all over the world.

What do you think that Google Earth map would look like 4000 years ago? I think there would be hardly any desert areas at all ... Maybe none. How about you? What's your guess? How would you go about making an educated guess?
I personally would read Gilgamesh and then extrapolate the entire global climate from that
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 12, 2016, 10:38:39 AM
Probably no point at all for you because you don't seem interested in the topic
On the contrary, a lot of us are very interested.

Much more interested than you are, in fact, as is evidenced by the fact that we are interested in the evidence for oscillating cycles of warm and cool periods on earth, which you aren't interested in at all.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 12, 2016, 10:40:03 AM
I am not interested - in this thread - in what happened more than 4000 years ago.

My question pertains to the last 4000 years. I have given you evidence that a pastoral society existed in SE Algeria up until about 1000 BC.

So 4000 years ago, the area that is now the Sahara was probably pretty dang green. 

Why wouldn't other (present day) deserts be green back then too?
Exactly!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 12, 2016, 10:49:37 AM
I am not interested - in this thread - in what happened more than 4000 years ago.

My question pertains to the last 4000 years. I have given you evidence that a pastoral society existed in SE Algeria up until about 1000 BC.

So 4000 years ago, the area that is now the Sahara was probably pretty dang green. 

Why wouldn't other (present day) deserts be green back then too?

They were - or rather green-er, or, if you prefer, the desert ecosystems covered a smaller area, and the surrounding grasslands covered more of them.

I found an article here (http://www.unep.org/geo/gdoutlook/025.asp), which you won't read, of course, but it summarises things quite well:

Quote
During the warm early to mid-Holocene (8 000- 5 000 yBP), the global climate that resulted from glacial retreat brought an increase in the intensity of the monsoon throughout the sub-tropical arid lands. Lake Chad became a freshwater inland lake bigger than today's Caspian Sea, in an area that has again become a complete desert. Tropical forests and dry woodlands around the equator expanded north and south, while deserts moved into the mid-latitudes. During that period, the southern Sahara and the Sahel were much wetter than today, with extensive vegetation cover, thriving animal communities, and numerous human settlements.

Sometime between 6 000 and 5 000 yBP, there was again a transition to more arid conditions. Mesic vegetation communities disappeared rapidly, lake levels declined dramatically, and highly mobile pastoralist cultures started to dominate and replace sedentary lacustrine and riparian traditions. The Liwa region of the United Arab Emirates, for example, experienced phases of sand deposition that lead to the formation of a large (up to 160 m high) mega-dune. A similar transition towards more arid conditions occurred in North America, where the Holocene brought the arrival of Mojave, Chihuahuan and Sonoran desert scrub elements from the south, such as the agaves, cacti, ocotillos (Fouquieria), and creosote bushes that characterize the area today.






Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 12, 2016, 10:50:14 AM

Yes, there "any deserts presently greening naturally".

I posted lots of links to Ethiopian deserts that greened naturally when grazing was stopped.

However, in general, global warming means that deserts are currently getting dryer, not wetter. You'd expect deserts to green when humidity increases not when it is reducing.
Let me ask it this way ... You've seen the current Google Earth world maps showing deserts all over the world.

What do you think that Google Earth map would look like 4000 years ago? I think there would be hardly any desert areas at all ... Maybe none. How about you? What's your guess? How would you go about making an educated guess?
Dave do you understand that if you do not water house plants they die?
Do you also understand that mountains are tall?
And that water laden air going over them lose water before going over?

That means the plants on the other side do not get water.
And what happens to plants that do not get water?

There were mountains 4000 years ago.
The winds pretty much blew in the same direction back then.
Conclusion there were deserts.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 12, 2016, 10:53:24 AM
I am not interested - in this thread - in what happened more than 4000 years ago.

My question pertains to the last 4000 years. I have given you evidence that a pastoral society existed in SE Algeria up until about 1000 BC.

So 4000 years ago, the area that is now the Sahara was probably pretty dang green. 

Why wouldn't other (present day) deserts be green back then too?

Dave do you really think that that is logical thinking?

When I was a boy, I had balls.  I still do.

Why wouldn't Pingu and Borealis have balls when they were young?
Or your ex-wife?

Do you honestly not see just how stupid your reasoning is?

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 12, 2016, 11:06:29 AM
I am not interested - in this thread - in what happened more than 4000 years ago.

My question pertains to the last 4000 years. I have given you evidence that a pastoral society existed in SE Algeria up until about 1000 BC.

So 4000 years ago, the area that is now the Sahara was probably pretty dang green.
Unwarranted conclusion. the Sahara is big enough to accommodate many ecosystems.

 And exactly how green is "pretty dang green"?

Quote
Why wouldn't other (present day) deserts be green back then too?
First establish the climate of the entire Sahara 4000 years ago.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 12, 2016, 11:27:02 AM

So, how about 5,000 14C years, which according to you is significantly fewer calendar years?

Africa During the Last 150,000 Years (http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/nercAFRICA.html)

Quote
6,500-5,000 14C y.a. Conditions across northern, central and east Africa became somewhat drier than before, but were still moister than today. For example, on the basis of pollen and charcoal, Neumann et al. (1995) suggest a mixture of semi-desert and denser scrub and grassland for the western Sahara, in areas that are now extremely arid. A similar picture is obtained by Ritchie (1994) on the basis of pollen evidence, and by Lario et al. (1997) for the Blue Nile on the basis of sedimentological and zoological indicators.
Conditions across the Sahara region and the Arabian Peninsula at 6,00014C y.a. have been summarized in a 1-degree database and set of biome maps presented by Hoelzmann et al. (1998), using pollen and charcoal data. Their map suggests a picture that is in essence similar to that given in the maps below; note however that from their useage of categories for the present-actual map, their category of 'steppe' appears to correspond to 'semi-desert' in the QEN vegetation scheme, and their 'savanna' corresponds more closely to the QEN 'grasslands' and 'scrub'. Hoezelmann et al. also suggest a very extensive area of wetlands south-east of Lake Mega-Chad, rivalling the lake itself in scale; they suggest that at 6,000 14C y.a., rainfall in the catchment area was around 300-350mm higher than today in order to sustain this high water level. Other extensive wetland areas are suggested for the interior of the eastern Arabian Peninsula. The map reconstructions of Hoelzmann et al for 6,000 14C y.a. are downloadable from this link (http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/afr(5ky.gif)

East Africa may also have been moister than at present, though drier than it had been during earlier stages of the Holocene (Hamilton 1982, Maitima 1991).

There may also have been a temporary return of moisture conditions and lake levels to early-Holocene conditions at around 5,500 - 5,000 14C y.a. (Petit-Maire & Gua 1996), for which period the map given here may not give enough moist-climate vegetation (maps for 8,000-7,000 14C y.a. could be more representative for this phase). Throughout the period 6,500-5,000 14C y.a., the Sahara was mainly vegetated (Lezine 1989, Ritchie 1994), and rainforest extent was greater than today (Hamilton 1988, and see main QEN review for 5,000 14C y.a. timeslice).

After about 5,000 14C y.a., lake levels suggest that aridity in north Africa became more severe, culminating in an arid phase about 3,800 14C y.a., a part-way return to moist conditions 4,000-3,000 14C y.a., and a decline to aridity thereafter (Petit-Maire & Gua 1996).

-------------

Since 5,50014C y.a., the climate across Africa seems to have been relatively similar to the present. An arid phase with some forest retreat is observed for around 2,600 14C y.a. in pollen records from Cameroon and some places in central Africa (Elenga et al. 1994, van Geel et al. 1996). (http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/nercAFRICA.html)
(http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/afr(5ky.gif)


So, exactly how green 4,000 calendarr years ago?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 12, 2016, 11:29:50 AM
He could look it up himself. There are plenty of science articles online that include timelines, archaeological information, climate information about the Sahara's last green period. It wasn't '4000 years ago' because 'pastoralists' either. 5500 years ago, after several centuries of being partially savannah-like, the Sahara started drying up again, slowly, at which time settled agriculturalists gave way to herders and people began settling into riverine communities, depending on the annual flooding to grow their food.

The Sahel, which is now spreading a little northward, is not even the area where those cave paintings are located (Algeria), but much further south.

Dave's just twisting the narrative to suit his pseudo-Biblical timeline. He abandoned the other thread and began this one because there were too many dates and locations conflicting with his Bible stories.


Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 12, 2016, 11:31:05 AM
Unwarranted conclusion. the Sahara is big enough to accommodate many ecosystems.

Indeed.

The area that Hawkins is fixated on is known to be exceptional (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Saharan_montane_xeric_woodlands): i.e. NOT typical of the Sahara desert on the whole.

This is among the objections that were raised in the previous thread, that Hawkins not only doesn't recognize as "valid", but apparently never even registered.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 12, 2016, 12:23:46 PM
As for the Sahara, what objections were raised that the (most recent) drying of the Sahara was not caused by man?
Or maybe it was dragons.
What objections were raised that it was not caused by dragons?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 12, 2016, 12:24:38 PM
A more worthwhile question would be: Why did this question by dave need its own thread?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 12, 2016, 12:30:13 PM
A more worthwhile question would be: Why did this question by dave need its own thread?
Maybe because the number of questions he was evaD-ing in the other thread got too embarrassing?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 12, 2016, 01:21:10 PM
He's not interested in the topic.

He's only interested in being right.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 12, 2016, 06:50:53 PM
If I were somehow gain the ability to fly like Superman, would I be able to fly faster than Superman, just as fast as Superman or would I be slower than Superman?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 12, 2016, 06:55:12 PM
Unwarranted conclusion. the Sahara is big enough to accommodate many ecosystems.

Indeed.

The area that Hawkins is fixated on is known to be exceptional (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Saharan_montane_xeric_woodlands): i.e. NOT typical of the Sahara desert on the whole.

This is among the objections that were raised in the previous thread, that Hawkins not only doesn't recognize as "valid", but apparently never even registered.
Exceptional huh?

I Googled "rock art ___________ " and put several different areas across the present day Sahara including NW Chad and SW Egypt and got results. 

You want me to keep Googling? 

Or would you like to STFU and quit pretending you know anything about this topic?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 12, 2016, 06:58:12 PM
A more worthwhile question would be: Why did this question by dave need its own thread?
You guys really need more constructive things to do.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 12, 2016, 07:31:03 PM
Unwarranted conclusion. the Sahara is big enough to accommodate many ecosystems.

Indeed.

The area that Hawkins is fixated on is known to be exceptional (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Saharan_montane_xeric_woodlands): i.e. NOT typical of the Sahara desert on the whole.

This is among the objections that were raised in the previous thread, that Hawkins not only doesn't recognize as "valid", but apparently never even registered.
Exceptional huh?
Yes.
Exceptional.
Read the link, moron.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 12, 2016, 07:32:17 PM
Or would you like to STFU and quit pretending you know anything about this topic?
... says the idiot talking about "architecture" of the period.

:rofl:
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 12, 2016, 07:33:23 PM
A more worthwhile question would be: Why did this question by dave need its own thread?
You guys really need more constructive things to do.
Engaging with you, Bluffy, is not constructive.
However, it is entertaining and laughter is a good thing.

Now, back to my question about how fast I could fly in comparison to Superman. Faster? Just as fast? Or slower? Can you google that for me Bluffy?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 12, 2016, 07:47:10 PM
I read the link.  I'm not talking about PRESENT CONDITIONS.  I'm talking about PAST CONDITIONS ... which we can learn about from Rock Art.  I know nothing about SE Algerian architecture.  I've mentioned this twice I think.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 12, 2016, 07:48:15 PM
The rock art of SE Algeria is not "exceptional" ... there's plenty all over the area that we now call the Sahara.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 12, 2016, 07:58:04 PM
I know nothing about SE Algerian architecture.  I've mentioned this twice I think.
Exactly.
Yet you thought it would be worth Borealis's while to learn about it.
It doesn't exist.
And here you are pretending to know more about the period than anyone else.
I don't pretend to be any kind of expert on the subject but, as I said, I have read de Villier's book on the subject.
Where does your vast knowledge of the subject come from?
The fact that your franooglng search words gives you "hits"?
Dollars to donuts, you haven't even bothered reading those hits.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 12, 2016, 07:58:42 PM
The rock art of SE Algeria is not "exceptional" ... there's plenty all over the area that we now call the Sahara.
No, there isn't.

See how easy the unsupported assertion is?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 12, 2016, 08:09:09 PM
Borealis mentioned that she likes architecture.  So I suggested she study SE Algerian architecture, having no idea whether any exists or not.  And you have no idea either.  And no one here cares.

And yes there is plenty of rock art all over what we now call the Sahara ... you apparently cannot Google.

Northern Chad ... http://africanrockart.org/rock-art-gallery/chad/

SW Egypt ... http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/africa/gilf_kebir_cave_of_swimmers/

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 12, 2016, 08:12:30 PM
Keep going ... Northern Mali ... crocodiles ...

Quote
Throughout the desert, archaeologists and palaeontologists have documented skeletons of crocodiles in areas as unlikely as Algeria, Libya and northern Mali, proving that crocodiles roamed in a greener Sahara thousands of years ago. https://blog.britishmuseum.org/category/collection/african-rock-art/
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Gullwind on June 12, 2016, 08:15:20 PM
Keep going ... Northern Mali ... crocodiles ...

Quote
Throughout the desert, archaeologists and palaeontologists have documented skeletons of crocodiles in areas as unlikely as Algeria, Libya and northern Mali, proving that crocodiles roamed in a greener Sahara thousands of years ago. https://blog.britishmuseum.org/category/collection/african-rock-art/

From his link: "The situation was very different ten thousand years ago."
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 12, 2016, 08:42:21 PM
Borealis mentioned that she likes architecture.  So I suggested she study SE Algerian architecture, having no idea whether any exists or not.  And you have no idea either.  And no one here cares.

And yes there is plenty of rock art all over what we now call the Sahara ... you apparently cannot Google.

Northern Chad ... http://africanrockart.org/rock-art-gallery/chad/

SW Egypt ... http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/africa/gilf_kebir_cave_of_swimmers/


And you think this handful of sites is typical of the whole Sahara?

They are not.

And even if they were, that doesn't help you with your dumb thesis that the Sahara desert is man-made.

Fractal flailure.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 12, 2016, 11:38:48 PM
A more worthwhile question would be: Why did this question by dave need its own thread?
You guys really need more constructive things to do.
And how does starting yet another 'look-at-me' thread make you help us with that?

We could easily respond to your "question" whether it was in the Ehrlich thread or in a new one.

Do you have ANY reason for starting a new thread, other than your own narcissistic self-serving obsessions?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 12, 2016, 11:40:04 PM
Keep going ... Northern Mali ... crocodiles ...

Quote
Throughout the desert, archaeologists and palaeontologists have documented skeletons of crocodiles in areas as unlikely as Algeria, Libya and northern Mali, proving that crocodiles roamed in a greener Sahara thousands of years ago. https://blog.britishmuseum.org/category/collection/african-rock-art/
Nobody is disputing that the Sahara was greener thousands of years ago.  In fact we've pointed to evidence that it was.

Your claim was that it is "largely man-made".  That is turned out to be wrong.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 12:12:30 AM
He's not interested in the topic.
Perhaps true.

Quote
He's only interested in being right.
Maybe not entirely true. Dave told us what he is interested in. He is interested in creating a legacy.

I will probably do it for the rest of my life because one question I ask myself is "What will be my legacy? When I die will I have made a contribution to the world?"  And one way to make a lasting contribution is by writing.  ...
He didn't say anything about being right. He wants a following to carry his "legacy" and he seems to have that.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 13, 2016, 12:47:39 AM
Well, he seems to think his "legacy" is a bunch of writing in which he is "right" about stuff that is demonstrably wrong.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: osmanthus on June 13, 2016, 01:14:10 AM
You've done this before, haven't you. :grin:
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 13, 2016, 01:46:45 AM
He's not interested in the topic.
Perhaps true.

Quote
He's only interested in being right.
Maybe not entirely true. Dave told us what he is interested in. He is interested in creating a legacy.

I will probably do it for the rest of my life because one question I ask myself is "What will be my legacy? When I die will I have made a contribution to the world?"  And one way to make a lasting contribution is by writing.  ...
He didn't say anything about being right. He wants a following to carry his "legacy" and he seems to have that.

Lol. We are his followers. Double lol.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 13, 2016, 03:27:54 AM
He's not interested in the topic.
Perhaps true.

Quote
He's only interested in being right.
Maybe not entirely true. Dave told us what he is interested in. He is interested in creating a legacy.

I will probably do it for the rest of my life because one question I ask myself is "What will be my legacy? When I die will I have made a contribution to the world?"  And one way to make a lasting contribution is by writing.  ...
He didn't say anything about being right. He wants a following to carry his "legacy" and he seems to have that.
Donald Trump tells us he is the least racist person you'll ever meet.
I don't always take a person's self-evaluation at face value.
Especially when he has a firmly established reputation as a raging narcissist.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 04:23:10 AM
Keep going ... Northern Mali ... crocodiles ...

Quote
Throughout the desert, archaeologists and palaeontologists have documented skeletons of crocodiles in areas as unlikely as Algeria, Libya and northern Mali, proving that crocodiles roamed in a greener Sahara thousands of years ago. https://blog.britishmuseum.org/category/collection/african-rock-art/
Nobody is disputing that the Sahara was greener thousands of years ago.  In fact we've pointed to evidence that it was.

Your claim was that it is "largely man-made".  That is turned out to be wrong.
You don't know that it's wrong.  You don't have enough information.  It's statements like this that firm up my idea that you are either not honest, or you're not a very good scientist.  I don't have enough information either.  I don't have enough information to know - for sure - that the Sahara was manmade.  We're talking about ancient history here and we only have clues.  But the clues we have are as follows ...

1) Long time ago there was enough vegetation (including trees) to support large mammals
2) Less time ago there was enough vegetation to support herding societies
3) We know that a common human tendency is to DEFOREST to create cropland / pastureland
4) There is evidence that forests actually help it rain more ... so removing forests may make it rain less
5) Therefore, it is likely that the Sahara was manmade
6) As a bonus, Paul Ehrlich wrote that the Sahara was largely manmade in 1970 ... doesn't make it true, but adds to the support in favor of that view
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 13, 2016, 04:49:44 AM
Massive logic fail there.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 13, 2016, 05:17:39 AM
Unwarranted conclusion. the Sahara is big enough to accommodate many ecosystems.

Indeed.

The area that Hawkins is fixated on is known to be exceptional (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Saharan_montane_xeric_woodlands): i.e. NOT typical of the Sahara desert on the whole.

This is among the objections that were raised in the previous thread, that Hawkins not only doesn't recognize as "valid", but apparently never even registered.
Exceptional huh?

I Googled "rock art ___________ " and put several different areas across the present day Sahara including NW Chad and SW Egypt and got results. 

You want me to keep Googling? 

Or would you like to STFU and quit pretending you know anything about this topic?
We'll gladly concede there's rock art of various dates all across the Sahara.

The subject is ecosystems.

As evinced by my use of the word "ecosystems" and not "rock art".

Duh.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 13, 2016, 05:42:18 AM
Keep going ... Northern Mali ... crocodiles ...

Quote
Throughout the desert, archaeologists and palaeontologists have documented skeletons of crocodiles in areas as unlikely as Algeria, Libya and northern Mali, proving that crocodiles roamed in a greener Sahara thousands of years ago. https://blog.britishmuseum.org/category/collection/african-rock-art/
Nobody is disputing that the Sahara was greener thousands of years ago.  In fact we've pointed to evidence that it was.

Your claim was that it is "largely man-made".  That is turned out to be wrong.
You don't know that it's wrong.  You don't have enough information.
Yes we do.  The fact that you are ignoring that information doesn't make it go away.

Quote
I don't have enough information to know - for sure - that the Sahara was manmade.  We're talking about ancient history here and we only have clues. But the clues we have are as follows ...

0-) Thousands of climatalogical and geological and archaelogical investigations soundly disproving your fantasy.  Ignoring them doesn't make them go away.
FIFY.

Quote
1) Long time ago there was enough vegetation (including trees) to support large mammals
(http://cache2.asset-cache.net/xd/505120871.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=62CA815BFB1CE480136FD4524FBB08295145F92974FB5D86C04A096E5446BD4E251996A3F06BD3CB)

Quote
2) Less time ago there was enough vegetation to support herding societies
(http://www.wanderonworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/visita-tribu-samburu-1.jpg)

Quote
3) We know that a common human tendency is to DEFOREST to create cropland / pastureland [/quote
In some cases, yes.  In others, no.

Quote
4) There is evidence that forests actually help it rain more ... so removing forests may make it rain less
In some cases forests increase rain slightly.  Therefore in some cases removing forests may make it rain slightly less.  Do those cases include the Sahara? If so, is any change in rain significant?

5) Therefore, it is likely that the Sahara was manmade except for the mountains of evidence that I'm ignoring that show that it wasn't.
FIFY.

Quote
6) As a bonus, Paul Ehrlich wrote that the Sahara was largely manmade in 1970 ... doesn't make it true, but adds to the support in favor of that view
Er, no it doesn't. Just another unsupported opinion. from someone with no expertise in climatology.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 13, 2016, 05:56:54 AM
Keep going ... Northern Mali ... crocodiles ...

Quote
Throughout the desert, archaeologists and palaeontologists have documented skeletons of crocodiles in areas as unlikely as Algeria, Libya and northern Mali, proving that crocodiles roamed in a greener Sahara thousands of years ago. https://blog.britishmuseum.org/category/collection/african-rock-art/
Nobody is disputing that the Sahara was greener thousands of years ago.  In fact we've pointed to evidence that it was.

Your claim was that it is "largely man-made".  That is turned out to be wrong.
You don't know that it's wrong.  You don't have enough information.


We don't know for sure that anything is wrong.  We often know with high probability though, for instance, if subsequent data are incompatible with it, as in this case.  Same with Price.

Quote
It's statements like this that firm up my idea that you are either not honest, or you're not a very good scientist.

No, it just means that I used common English rather than Reverse Swahili Pig Latin. 


Quote
I don't have enough information either.

And you never will because you are only willing to consider evidence that supports your a priori conclusion.
Quote

I don't have enough information to know - for sure - that the Sahara was manmade.
No, you don't.  But you have plenty of information that indicates that it was not.  But you ignore it.

Quote
We're talking about ancient history here and we only have clues.  But the clues we have are as follows ...

1) Long time ago there was enough vegetation (including trees) to support large mammals
2) Less time ago there was enough vegetation to support herding societies

Ancient history but not ancient times.  And yes.  All of which is consistent with the model that we are going through a part of the oscillatory climate cycle in which deserts increase.

Quote
3) We know that a common human tendency is to DEFOREST to create cropland / pastureland
We also know that a common human tendency is to wishful thinking.

Quote
4) There is evidence that forests actually help it rain more ... so removing forests may make it rain less

We've already been through this.  Certainly forests increase humidity and local precipitation.  The only "evidence" (hypothesis actually) that forests actually divert vast oceanic volumes of moist air is a) still hypothetical and b) clearly only applies to vast rainforests - possibly only the Amazon, because of its specific geography, and there is no evidence that the Sahara was ever a rainforest, at least in the last few millenia.


Quote
5) Therefore, it is likely that the Sahara was manmade
No.  You are simply an idiot.

Quote
6) As a bonus, Paul Ehrlich wrote that the Sahara was largely manmade in 1970 ... doesn't make it true, but adds to the support in favor of that view
No, it doesn't, any more than the fact that Newton thought that alchemy was true adds to the support in favor of that view.  Good people can be wrong.  Good scientists not only accept that they were wrong, they actually try to falsify their own models.

Unlike you.  It's one of the many senses in which you are not a scientist.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 13, 2016, 06:01:46 AM
[snip bullshit "reasoning"]Therefore, it is likely that the Sahara was manmade

(https://mealtimehostage.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/picard-facepalm.jpg)

Dave, this is essentially your "argument", in all its glory:

The Sahara used to be green. When it was green it had herding societies. Humans often deforest lands to make room for pasture. Deforestation may lead to drier climates. Therefore, the Sahara is "likely" man-made.

In all honesty: Do you REALLLY not see any problems with that?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 06:20:34 AM
[snip bullshit "reasoning"]Therefore, it is likely that the Sahara was manmade

(https://mealtimehostage.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/picard-facepalm.jpg)

Dave, this is essentially your "argument", in all its glory:

The Sahara used to be green. When it was green it had herding societies. Humans often deforest lands to make room for pasture. Deforestation may lead to drier climates. Therefore, the Sahara is "likely" man-made.

In all honesty: Do you REALLLY not see any problems with that?

Nope.   And I'm sorry that you don't see the logic, but I must move on. Agriculture needs saving!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 06:24:48 AM
 And the only way to save agriculture is to create a new agriculture that enhances ecosystems instead of destroys them.  I'm making excellent progress on that front. My goats appear to be the happiest, healthiest goats on the planet and I have cut out commercial feeds completely from their diet with no discernible change in milk production.  My female rabbits have also transitioned to an entirely forage-based diet and the male rabbit will follow shortly.   My sustainable housing projects are also going well as are my dealings with my local county.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 13, 2016, 06:45:55 AM
[snip bullshit "reasoning"]Therefore, it is likely that the Sahara was manmade

(https://mealtimehostage.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/picard-facepalm.jpg)

Dave, this is essentially your "argument", in all its glory:

The Sahara used to be green. When it was green it had herding societies. Humans often deforest lands to make room for pasture. Deforestation may lead to drier climates. Therefore, the Sahara is "likely" man-made.

In all honesty: Do you REALLLY not see any problems with that?

Nope.
Amazing.
Quote
And I'm sorry that you don't see the logic,
There is no "logic" there (and if you used the same 'rationale' for different issues, you would see it yourself). Just unsupported speculations with zero evidence.
IOW, story-telling.

But I guess that's what your whole worldview is based on.
Quote
but I must move on. Agriculture needs saving!
So you started a new thread just to bail from it because "agriculture needs saving"?

Whatever, dave. It's a shame that the "legacy" you dream of offering the world will be nothing more than a practical treatise on logical fallacies and empty bluster. But I guess that can also be useful for future generations...

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 13, 2016, 06:55:53 AM
My goats appear to be the happiest, healthiest goats on the planet
Dave.

Just listen to yourself.

You're losing it.





(And I'm saying "listen" because I'm pretty sure that, at this point, you're talking to yourself all the time)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 07:03:37 AM
"Losing it"

Lol

Funny, Faid.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: DaveGodfrey on June 13, 2016, 07:25:22 AM
True.

You never had it in the first place Dave.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 13, 2016, 07:32:01 AM
No Dave, in fact you do appear to be losing it, or at least indulging in ridiculous hyperbole and plenty of fantasising. You're a single guy living in a nice bit of countryside fiddling around with hobby farming. You bought a couple healthy milking goats, which you keep in a small cage because you panicked when you found out they were better at wandering off than you were at making fences.

And on that basis you're maundering on about saving the world, fighting big ag, leaving a legacy.

Step back for a few seconds and look at your words.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 07:37:42 AM
 Borealis - like Lucy - offers psychiatric help for five cents.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 07:38:27 AM
"look at my words"
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 07:38:35 AM
I
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 07:38:43 AM
Have
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 07:38:54 AM
 The happiest
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 07:39:05 AM
 Goats
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 07:39:15 AM
 On the planet.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 07:39:36 AM
 Did I stutter? Is there a point to this exercise?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 13, 2016, 07:43:56 AM
"Losing it"

Lol

Funny, Faid.
Not as funny as "my goats appear to be the happiest, healthiest goats on the friggin' planet".

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 13, 2016, 07:46:20 AM
Did I stutter? Is there a point to this exercise?
Other than a deep dive in the delusions of a narcissist, no.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 13, 2016, 07:49:08 AM
You're a single guy living in a nice bit of countryside fiddling around with hobby farming.
I think that's the problem. Loneliness is starting to get to him.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 13, 2016, 08:11:37 AM
Missouri! Where men are men and goats are nervous!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 13, 2016, 08:54:04 AM
[snip bullshit "reasoning"]Therefore, it is likely that the Sahara was manmade

(https://mealtimehostage.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/picard-facepalm.jpg)

Dave, this is essentially your "argument", in all its glory:

The Sahara used to be green. When it was green it had herding societies. Humans often deforest lands to make room for pasture. Deforestation may lead to drier climates. Therefore, the Sahara is "likely" man-made.

In all honesty: Do you REALLLY not see any problems with that?

Nope.  And I'm sorry that you don't see the logic, but I must move on. Agriculture needs saving!

Well, take it from one who knows, Dave, that that logic is bullshit.  And if you are trying to use bullshit logic like that without even being able to see that it is bullshit logic, then you aren't going to have much success in Saving Agriculture.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 08:54:27 AM
Well, he seems to think his "legacy" is a bunch of writing in which he is "right" about stuff that is demonstrably wrong.

Yeah, that seems to be the consensus.

Dave represents a certain point of view, which is based on certain religious texts. He is being consistent with his beliefs and interpretation of said religious texts. It turns out that said religious texts are inconsistent with current data. But I have to give Dave some bit of credit. It can't be easy to support a text that provides only about 6,000 yrs to explain the whole world, especially up against scientists who are working with billions of years. Working with such limited resources, Dave has to lean heavily on his imagination to smooth out the gaping holes his religious texts present to any believer. His legacy isn't that he was right, but that he has a powerful imagination.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 13, 2016, 09:34:16 AM
Well, he seems to think his "legacy" is a bunch of writing in which he is "right" about stuff that is demonstrably wrong.

Yeah, that seems to be the consensus.

Dave represents a certain point of view, which is based on certain religious texts. He is being consistent with his beliefs and interpretation of said religious texts. It turns out that said religious texts are inconsistent with current data. But I have to give Dave some bit of credit. It can't be easy to support a text that provides only about 6,000 yrs to explain the whole world, especially up against scientists who are working with billions of years. Working with such limited resources, Dave has to lean heavily on his imagination to smooth out the gaping holes his religious texts present to any believer. His legacy isn't that he was right, but that he has a powerful imagination.
Well, yes.  And actually I have some respect for (some) YEC "scientists" who start with a clear standpoint of faith, and try to find out why the world looks as though it is 4.5 billion years old when it cannot be older than 6,000.  But Dave doesn't do this.  He claims that the evidence supports YEC, and indeed that the evidence supports any other conclusion that he wants to come to. 

And to enable himself to do this, he is forced to conclude that everyone else is lying or stupid.  That's why I lost most of my respect for Dave.   But his misogyny was the last straw.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 13, 2016, 09:51:31 AM

4) There is evidence that forests actually help it rain more ... so removing forests may make it rain less


1. The more I study the more I lean.
2. The more I learn the more I know.
3. The more I know the more I can forget.
4. The more I can forget the more I will forget.
5. The more I forget the less I know.

Therefore the more I study the less I know.

Do you agree with that logic?
IF not then why do you use it?

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 09:52:19 AM
Well, yes.  And actually I have some respect for (some) YEC "scientists" who start with a clear standpoint of faith, and try to find out why the world looks as though it is 4.5 billion years old when it cannot be older than 6,000.  But Dave doesn't do this.  He claims that the evidence supports YEC, and indeed that the evidence supports any other conclusion that he wants to come to. 

And to enable himself to do this, he is forced to conclude that everyone else is lying or stupid.  That's why I lost most of my respect for Dave.  But his misogyny was the last straw.
Well, I didn't know all of that. That's pretty sad, really. People don't choose who they are, as you know. But, I can't have any respect for misogyny and such like minded prejudices.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 13, 2016, 10:02:48 AM
Oh, I think people choose who they are :)

In fact, I think our choices define who we are as people.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 13, 2016, 10:14:35 AM
I've been wondering what the point of this thread is. What does Bluffy hope it will do? What does it matter if there are deserts that are currently greening naturally or there are none? Is Bluffy still in the mode of "if I can't see it happening, it can't happen"?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 10:23:14 AM
Oh, I think people choose who they are :)

In fact, I think our choices define who we are as people.
I think you are using "choose" in a funny way then. You really think people choose to be straight or gay for instance? I mean, sure we can usually choose our actions, but not who we are.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 13, 2016, 10:31:28 AM
I've been wondering what the point of this thread is. What does Bluffy hope it will do? What does it matter if there are deserts that are currently greening naturally or there are none? Is Bluffy still in the mode of "if I can't see it happening, it can't happen"?
We are at the point were me and Rex argue about free will :)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 13, 2016, 10:35:28 AM
"Who we are" is not defined by our sexuality, orientation, or gender. I assume you don't think the personality, choices, beliefs, actions, interactions, hobbies, career choices, opinions, etc. of an individual are strictly a result of who they want to fuck.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 13, 2016, 10:40:26 AM
Keep going ... Northern Mali ... crocodiles ...

Quote
Throughout the desert, archaeologists and palaeontologists have documented skeletons of crocodiles in areas as unlikely as Algeria, Libya and northern Mali, proving that crocodiles roamed in a greener Sahara thousands of years ago. https://blog.britishmuseum.org/category/collection/african-rock-art/
Nobody is disputing that the Sahara was greener thousands of years ago.  In fact we've pointed to evidence that it was.

Your claim was that it is "largely man-made".  That is turned out to be wrong.
You don't know that it's wrong.  You don't have enough information.  It's statements like this that firm up my idea that you are either not honest, or you're not a very good scientist.  I don't have enough information either.  I don't have enough information to know - for sure - that the Sahara was manmade.  We're talking about ancient history here and we only have clues.  But the clues we have are as follows ...

1) Long time ago there was enough vegetation (including trees) to support large mammals
2) Less time ago there was enough vegetation to support herding societies
3) We know that a common human tendency is to DEFOREST to create cropland / pastureland
4) There is evidence that forests actually help it rain more ... so removing forests may make it rain less
5) Therefore, it is likely that the Sahara was manmade
6) As a bonus, Paul Ehrlich wrote that the Sahara was largely manmade in 1970 ... doesn't make it true, but adds to the support in favor of that view
Therefore? It appears you need to learn what that word means.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 13, 2016, 10:41:20 AM
Unwarranted conclusion. the Sahara is big enough to accommodate many ecosystems.

Indeed.

The area that Hawkins is fixated on is known to be exceptional (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Saharan_montane_xeric_woodlands): i.e. NOT typical of the Sahara desert on the whole.

This is among the objections that were raised in the previous thread, that Hawkins not only doesn't recognize as "valid", but apparently never even registered.
Exceptional huh?

I Googled "rock art ___________ " and put several different areas across the present day Sahara including NW Chad and SW Egypt and got results. 

You want me to keep Googling? 

Or would you like to STFU and quit pretending you know anything about this topic?
We'll gladly concede there's rock art of various dates all across the Sahara.

The subject is ecosystems.

As evinced by my use of the word "ecosystems" and not "rock art".

Duh.
lol
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 10:44:10 AM
We are at the point were me and Rex argue about free will :)
lol :)

Ok, let's do that in a separate thread. Last I knew you recognized free will as a kind of delusion. I'm still there. If you can convince me otherwise I'll give you whatever you want (within reason, of course). Bring it on!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 10:45:31 AM
"Who we are" is not defined by our sexuality, orientation, or gender. I assume you don't think the personality, choices, beliefs, actions, interactions, hobbies, career choices, opinions, etc. of an individual are strictly a result of who they want to fuck.
Good assumption there. :yes:
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 13, 2016, 10:45:47 AM
[snip bullshit "reasoning"]Therefore, it is likely that the Sahara was manmade

(https://mealtimehostage.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/picard-facepalm.jpg)

Dave, this is essentially your "argument", in all its glory:

The Sahara used to be green. When it was green it had herding societies. Humans often deforest lands to make room for pasture. Deforestation may lead to drier climates. Therefore, the Sahara is "likely" man-made.

In all honesty: Do you REALLLY not see any problems with that?

Nope.  And I'm sorry that you don't see the logic, but I must move on. Agriculture needs saving!
I hope other people here take as much pleasure from the art of this as I do.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 13, 2016, 10:52:15 AM
Oh, I think people choose who they are :)

In fact, I think our choices define who we are as people.
I think you are using "choose" in a funny way then. You really think people choose to be straight or gay for instance? I mean, sure we can usually choose our actions, but not who we are.
yeah. I tend to agree with you. I've noticed that it's a lot easier to claim that we choose who we are at times when our self confidence is highest. There are so many environmental factors that I am not sure it's all that meaningful a distinction.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 13, 2016, 10:55:58 AM
Freewill wouldn't or at least shouldn't apply in this case. Freewill refers to the freedom to make choices. Unless you are saying self identity is a choice. If you are, then I agree. For a Buddha, it is a choice.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 13, 2016, 11:36:25 AM
Freewill wouldn't or at least shouldn't apply in this case. Freewill refers to the freedom to make choices. Unless you are saying self identity is a choice. If you are, then I agree. For a Buddha, it is a choice.
Well, I think we are essentially choosing machines.  Some things we have virtually zero "degrees of freedom". Others we have lot.

I don't think "free will" is a delusion, unless by "free will" we mean what is sometimes called "libertarian free will".  In which case, I think it's not so much a delusion as an incoherent concept.  And a bad answer to an ill-posed question for which there isn't a good one.

I think a better question is "how free am I?" and I think the answer depends not so much on how we define "free" but how we define "I".  And I think that any sensible definition of "I" leads to the answer "really quite free, but with more degrees of freedom over some things than others, and probably a lot more than any other animal on earth".
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 01:23:11 PM
Well, I think we are essentially choosing machines.  Some things we have virtually zero "degrees of freedom". Others we have lot.
Yup, and in the case of who we are we have very little if any choice. I can't just choose to enjoy say beef or chicken liver, which I hate or dislike the taste of coffee, which I love. I can't choose to be homosexual, although I could choose to have homosexual sex. It would feel unnatural and revolting to me. A person can't choose to be a sociopath or a narcissist. They can however choose to behave as though they are not those things and really fool others.

Quote
I don't think "free will" is a delusion, unless by "free will" we mean what is sometimes called "libertarian free will".  In which case, I think it's not so much a delusion as an incoherent concept.  And a bad answer to an ill-posed question for which there isn't a good one.
I agree.

Quote
I think a better question is "how free am I?" and I think the answer depends not so much on how we define "free" but how we define "I".  And I think that any sensible definition of "I" leads to the answer "really quite free, but with more degrees of freedom over some things than others, and probably a lot more than any other animal on earth".
Well, you can define "I" any way you choose or to suit whatever purpose you have in mind. However, "I" is another kind of model the brain constructs and uses to generate a contrast, in this case between self and other. Consciousness requires contrast, this is not a choice.

Do you think there is any degree of freedom the brain has to construct the "I" model? It must construct this model, else it could not distinguish between self and other. But apparently a brain has the freedom to embellish it's model of self. Can a person's brain so delude itself as to convert a non believer into a believer of god, or convert from gay to straight, or convert from a loather of liver to a lover of liver? Just a few of examples, there are countless others, where there is no real degree of freedom, at least not something the conscious mind can achieve.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 13, 2016, 01:40:54 PM
Quote
Can a person's brain so delude itself as to convert a non believer into a believer of god, or convert from gay to straight, or convert from a loather of liver to a lover of liver? Just a few of examples, there are countless others, where there is no real degree of freedom, at least not something the conscious mind can achieve.
Pingu is the expert here, but imo Some of These Things are Not Like the Others. A whole stew of physiological/neurological things are more or less involved in whether one is gay/straight/transgendered.  I think god beliefs, political beliefs, food likes and dislikes are on a different plane entirely, involving upbringing, life experience, multiple external factors.

I loathed a lot of different foods when I was young. I went hungry for a while and my food likes expanded enormously, and later with experiment, broadened even more. Some foods I used to like but no longer care for. I used to believe in god, now I don't, but I'm self aware enough to understand that it would take very little to convince myself to return to belief. My political leanings changed over time, back and forth. My world views have shifted greatly, and in various directions.

I think most things can be a matter of choice. Perhaps the experiences that lead to choices preclude many choices, but among those that remain available, choices can be made.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 13, 2016, 02:36:49 PM
Quote
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." - Dumbledore

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 02:46:28 PM
Pingu is the expert here, but imo Some of These Things are Not Like the Others. A whole stew of physiological/neurological things are more or less involved in whether one is gay/straight/transgendered.  I think god beliefs, political beliefs, food likes and dislikes are on a different plane entirely, involving upbringing, life experience, multiple external factors.
Yes, these things are all different, but what they have in common is that neither is a conscious choice, ever.

Quote
I loathed a lot of different foods when I was young. I went hungry for a while and my food likes expanded enormously, and later with experiment, broadened even more. Some foods I used to like but no longer care for. I used to believe in god, now I don't, but I'm self aware enough to understand that it would take very little to convince myself to return to belief. My political leanings changed over time, back and forth. My world views have shifted greatly, and in various directions.
You're providing evidence in support of my view. As you note, you changed, for various reasons, none of which was by conscious choice. One cannot merely will oneself to be something one is not already.

Quote
I think most things can be a matter of choice. Perhaps the experiences that lead to choices preclude many choices, but among those that remain available, choices can be made.
Well, as Lizzie stated, "we are choosing machines". So what? We make choices. But so too does the moth choose to go into the light. It's hardly free will. What we are is determined mostly by the genetics, I think, and to a lesser extent by the environment.

How many times have you done something and were surprised perhaps even shocked by the choice you made? It's moments like those where you start to realize we cannot simply choose to be other than we were born to be. And should we be different at some future time, it will not be on account of merely wanting to be different, but will ever be determined by the stuff that actually exists, genetics and environment.

There is still this uncanny sense that there is an I and I has desires, free will. Alas, there is no real material "I". Lizzie knows this. The sense of "I" (self) is merely a mental construct, a model if you like. It is not a real thing. By way of analogy compare the brain/mind to computer/software. If you are familiar with computers this analogy makes it pretty easy to see how the "I" could be simulated by software, even if no one has yet found the right algorithms to actually do it. Even without much knowledge of computers, one can discern the difference between the real and the artificial parts. We are choosing machines, said Lizzie. So too are computers choosing machines. But neither has the choice to change what they really are.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 13, 2016, 03:20:13 PM
Not all "real" things are "material", and a mental construct is not "merely" a mental construct - it's a mental construct.  There is more to reality than stuff that has mass.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 03:20:47 PM
Quote
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." - Dumbledore


You are quoting  J. K. Rowling (Harry Potter). Okay, so I say the quote is wrong since our choosing at all is first determined by our abilities. Only one of our abilities is the ability to choose things. So what does that say about us that cannot also be said of a computer?

I'm really wondering if we are talking past each other or if there is a real disagreement between us.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 03:22:07 PM
Not all "real" things are "material", and a mental construct is not "merely" a mental construct - it's a mental construct.  There is more to reality than stuff that has mass.
Yes, I know. But such things that are not themselves material are yet subject to the material.

ETA: you're minor corrections are noted.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 03:30:49 PM
RexT  swallowed the "misogyny" claim whole. Wow.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 03:32:46 PM
 In any case... Back to the topic of the thread... It appears to me that there is no evidence of a "desert greening" trend anywhere on earth if the time period that we are talking about is the last 10,000 years.  If you have any evidence that I'm mistaken about this, please post it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 13, 2016, 03:45:59 PM
Already did. On the first page. The Sahara. Now.  I've dug up the paper now. http://www.biogeosciences.net/6/469/2009/bg-6-469-2009.pdf.

Git a' reading, Davie-doodles. Hawkinsing it won't do.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 13, 2016, 03:52:02 PM
In any case... Back to the topic of the thread... It appears to me that there is no evidence of a "desert greening" trend anywhere on earth if the time period that we are talking about is the last 10,000 years.  If you have any evidence that I'm mistaken about this, please post it.

Why limit it to the past 10,000 years? One of the primary driving forces of cyclic climate change are the Milankovic cycles, all of which are at least twice that long and one is 4 times that period. It makes no sense whatsoever to look at time periods less than perhaps 100,000 years. It would be like looking at the tides over a 3 hour period. If it were a rising tide, all you would see would be a rising tide and could then easily conclude the tide will just keep rising. Or if that 3 hours spanned a slack tide, one might conclude the tides are minimal.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 13, 2016, 04:06:09 PM
[duplicate]
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 13, 2016, 04:08:12 PM

RexT  swallowed the "misogyny" claim whole. Wow.


Well, he has reason to know that I am truthful, mister I-bet-you-only-got-your-position-because-you-are-a-woman aka mr manipulative-bitch aka mr if-my-wife-wanted-a-career-after-the-wedding-and-hadn't-told-me-I'd-divorce-her.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 13, 2016, 04:11:47 PM
In any case... Back to the topic of the thread... It appears to me that there is no evidence of a "desert greening" trend anywhere on earth if the time period that we are talking about is the last 10,000 years.  If you have any evidence that I'm mistaken about this, please post it.


I already reminded you of the copious links I gave you to Ethiopia.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 13, 2016, 04:14:13 PM
Not all "real" things are "material", and a mental construct is not "merely" a mental construct - it's a mental construct.  There is more to reality than stuff that has mass.
Yes, I know. But such things that are not themselves material are yet subject to the material.

ETA: you're minor corrections are noted.

Yes, I know they are "subject to the material".  But the are not material, yet real.  You could destroy them while leaving all the material in existence.  A pattern is real, and made of material, but it is not the material it is made of.  The same material could make a different pattern.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 04:24:22 PM
Not all "real" things are "material", and a mental construct is not "merely" a mental construct - it's a mental construct.  There is more to reality than stuff that has mass.
Yes, I know. But such things that are not themselves material are yet subject to the material.

ETA: you're minor corrections are noted.

Yes, I know they are "subject to the material".  But the are not material, yet real.  You could destroy them while leaving all the material in existence.  A pattern is real, and made of material, but it is not the material it is made of.  The same material could make a different pattern.
Okay, so we seem to be in complete agreement here.

A wave is not itself a material, but is instead a dynamic form or pattern of some material which is carrying or if you like, transmitting energy. What caused the wave but other materials. Energy too, is not a material but rather a certain dynamic form or pattern of some material in which the energy is stored. Either way, whether matter or energy it's all just material in motion. Nothing more.

Thought, feelings, senses, etc., these are all dynamic forms or patterns of some material, namely, neurons in this case, in which the neurons carrying energy in specific forms (the exact way this happens is mostly outside my knowledge, but you would know) constitutes a thought or feeling, whatever, which is not itself a material thing, yet is entirely dependent on the material through which it is carried. Once the energy is spent, the wave crashes on the shore, there is left only that which was real, the material.

The question about will (itself a mental construct, a type of energy transmitted through a material form) is whether the temporal pattern can do anything to change the material in which it depends? I think probably not.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 04:35:16 PM
RexT  swallowed the "misogyny" claim whole. Wow.
In truth, I never actually form an opinion about someone through the "eyes" of others. I will form my own opinion of you, Dave, through my own interactions with you. And I hope you will give me the same respect.

As for Lizzie, well, I really do love that woman as a person. I have a massive respect for her intellect and her honesty. She is a powerful woman, a force to be reckoned with, A reservoir of wisdom and patience. She has a way of making you feel special if or when she turns her attention and kindness to you. I feel fortunate to have ever met her, let alone to have called her friend. And yet, I somehow manage to disagree with her on rare occasion.

ETA" I don't want to leave the impression that I agree with her in this particular case. I will have to wait and see.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 13, 2016, 05:42:31 PM
(https://i.chzbgr.com/full/7985697024/h896322BE/)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 13, 2016, 05:43:33 PM
People. Get a room. We're busy mocking Dave.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 13, 2016, 06:55:14 PM
Already did. On the first page. The Sahara. Now.  I've dug up the paper now. http://www.biogeosciences.net/6/469/2009/bg-6-469-2009.pdf.

Git a' reading, Davie-doodles. Hawkinsing it won't do.
My question was regarding the general trend over the last 10,000 years.  Does this paper address that?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 07:38:42 PM
(https://i.chzbgr.com/full/7985697024/h896322BE/)

I get your point, I think. But can we not all agree that Dave definitely has a genuine talent? Whether we could all agree on what that talent consists of might be another matter.

I can say I've never met anyone quite like him. I can say he commands the ability to motivate, rotate, and instigate the minds of all who come in contact with him. You can love or hate him as you like, either way he compels you to attend his affairs. This very thread is littered with testimonials of that very fact. Dave has a "magnetic field" emanating from his mind that pulls our "iron minds" to him. Could it be? Are we all hopelessly hooked on the Dave Hawkins show! :eek:
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 13, 2016, 10:37:09 PM
(https://i.chzbgr.com/full/7985697024/h896322BE/)

I get your point, I think. But can we not all agree that Dave definitely has a genuine talent? Whether we could all agree on what that talent consists of might be another matter.

I can say I've never met anyone quite like him. I can say he commands the ability to motivate, rotate, and instigate the minds of all who come in contact with him. You can love or hate him as you like, either way he compels you to attend his affairs. This very thread is littered with testimonials of that very fact. Dave has a "magnetic field" emanating from his mind that pulls our "iron minds" to him. Could it be? Are we all hopelessly hooked on the Dave Hawkins show! :eek:

I think you are way over thinking all of this. Bluffy is just a comedian who doesn't realize he is one or how amusing he is. There's no magnetic field, no iron minds. He's just a fool who likes to talk about himself online generally making a fool of himself in the process. I simply like poke him and laugh.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 13, 2016, 10:56:44 PM
I think you are way over thinking all of this. Bluffy is just a comedian who doesn't realize he is one or how amusing he is. There's no magnetic field, no iron minds. He's just a fool who likes to talk about himself online generally making a fool of himself in the process. I simply like poke him and laugh.
Yeah, could be you're right. Either way folks keep tuning in, probably each for their own reasons.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 03:32:44 AM

RexT  swallowed the "misogyny" claim whole. Wow.


Well, he has reason to know that I am truthful, mister I-bet-you-only-got-your-position-because-you-are-a-woman aka mr manipulative-bitch aka mr if-my-wife-wanted-a-career-after-the-wedding-and-hadn't-told-me-I'd-divorce-her.
You are more truthful than most, but you do mix in a fair amount of BS along with your truth. 

I don't see how the above items make me a "misogynist" ... two pieces of evidence combine to cause me to think the first item ... (a) your demonstrated lack of skill here at science, (b) your stated view that "women should be given more opportunity in the workplace" ... just putting two and two together.  As for the second, marriage is a "deal" ... a contract ... a partnership ... "I plan on doing this, this and this ... you plan on doing that, that and that."  If these things change, then there may need to be a conversation.  If a new agreement cannot be reached, then it might make sense to part ways.  Do you disagree?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 03:34:18 AM
In any case... Back to the topic of the thread... It appears to me that there is no evidence of a "desert greening" trend anywhere on earth if the time period that we are talking about is the last 10,000 years.  If you have any evidence that I'm mistaken about this, please post it.


I already reminded you of the copious links I gave you to Ethiopia.
Same question I asked JonF ... do these "copious links" indicate a general greening trend in Ethiopia over the past 10ka?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 04:52:58 AM

RexT  swallowed the "misogyny" claim whole. Wow.


Well, he has reason to know that I am truthful, mister I-bet-you-only-got-your-position-because-you-are-a-woman aka mr manipulative-bitch aka mr if-my-wife-wanted-a-career-after-the-wedding-and-hadn't-told-me-I'd-divorce-her.
You are more truthful than most, but you do mix in a fair amount of BS along with your truth. 

I don't see how the above items make me a "misogynist" ... two pieces of evidence combine to cause me to think the first item ... (a) your demonstrated lack of skill here at science,
LOL. Empty, vague slander presented as  "demonstrated" premise.

You're a joke, dave.
Quote
(b) your stated view that "women should be given more opportunity in the workplace" ... just putting two and two together.
Wow. So, if anyone says that women should be given more opportunities, they must have got their postition because they were women?
Thanks for that nice display of your misogynism there, dave. "Two and two together" indeed. 
Quote
As for the second, marriage is a "deal" ... a contract ... a partnership ... "I plan on doing this, this and this ... you plan on doing that, that and that."
Really? Was that the kind of wedding vows you had exchanged?
Ever heard of "Love", dave? Or is that a feeling you only reserve for your God (and yourself)? 
Quote
If these things change, then there may need to be a conversation.  If a new agreement cannot be reached, then it might make sense to part ways.  Do you disagree?
Actually, I don't. Surprised? You shouldn't be.
If your wife told you that she had thought about it and had decided to pursue an academic degree, and you told her "well in that case you're violating the terms of our 'deal' because I want you exclusively raising kids and in the kitchen, reconsider or GTFO"...
Well in that case, ditching your sorry misogynist ass on the spot would be the most proper course of action for her.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 04:59:15 AM
Quote
Same question I asked JonF ... do these "copious links" indicate a general greening trend in Ethiopia over the past 10ka?
Uuuuuh dave, you do realize that the entire Neolithic Subpluvial represents a "greening trend" within the last 10ka, right?

Or are you asking for evidence that the entire 10ka year span is a "greening trend"? Because no one claims that to be the case, and it's the Strawman of Strawmen.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 05:25:40 AM
Already did. On the first page. The Sahara. Now.  I've dug up the paper now. http://www.biogeosciences.net/6/469/2009/bg-6-469-2009.pdf.

Git a' reading, Davie-doodles. Hawkinsing it won't do.
My question was regarding the general trend over the last 10,000 years.  Does this paper address that?
The paper addresses the topic of the thread. So, you have no interest in the topic of the thread?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 05:27:03 AM
In any case... Back to the topic of the thread... It appears to me that there is no evidence of a "desert greening" trend anywhere on earth if the time period that we are talking about is the last 10,000 years.  If you have any evidence that I'm mistaken about this, please post it.


I already reminded you of the copious links I gave you to Ethiopia.
Same question I asked JonF ... do these "copious links" indicate a general greening trend in Ethiopia over the past 10ka?
Look at the topic of the thread.  It's at the top of every page.

If you have any evidence of a trend over the last 10,000 years, trot it out.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 05:28:06 AM
Dupe.

I do not like this editor.  I do not like it in a box, I do not like it served with lox.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 05:34:06 AM
Dupe.

I do not like this editor.  I do not like it in a box, I do not like it served with lox.
But would you like it with a fox or a pair of socks? Perhaps with rocks or a door that locks?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 05:55:34 AM
What if it autobanned all socks?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 06:04:09 AM
It seems to me that, so far, dave's "arguments" have been something like:

"Is it possible for deserts to 'green' naturally?"

"Yes"

"OK, but do we presently see any deserts 'greening'?"

"Yes"

"OK fine, but have we seen deserts 'greening' in the last 10000 years?"

"Yes"

OK whatever look, do we have a continuous 'greening trend' in deserts throughout these last 10000 years?"

"Um, no, why would that even-"

"A-HAH!!!!!!"

 ::)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 06:24:15 AM
Nice summary, Faid. I'm sure Dave wishes to thank you all for answering his question.

This concludes another episode of the Dave Hawkins Show. Many thanks to all our participants. Well, except for that pesky RexT guy.

Tune in next time where we will see Dave again probing the minds of real scientists, asking the real questions, and making real progress in achieving his real legacy.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 14, 2016, 06:29:38 AM
That word, 'real'...
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 06:33:19 AM
That word, 'real'...
It's a tricky one for sure. But keep tuning in and keeping it real.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 06:35:06 AM
 Fair point... I didn't mention anything about the past 10,000 years in the thread title.  My bad.

So... Thank you JonF for providing the paper about the Sahara greening up a bit.

Now... Do you want me to start a new thread to ask about greening trends in the last 10,000 years?

Or what?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 06:40:21 AM
No.  Just stop hopping from thread to thread.  You want to talk about the Sahara, so stick to this thread.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 06:44:19 AM
Fair point... I didn't mention anything about the past 10,000 years in the thread title.  My bad.

So... Thank you JonF for providing the paper about the Sahara greening up a bit.

Now... Do you want me to start a new thread to ask about greening trends in the last 10,000 years?

Or what?
Or.

What.

You shouldn't have started a new thread in the first place. Now you have one, though, so stick with it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 06:47:54 AM

RexT  swallowed the "misogyny" claim whole. Wow.


Well, he has reason to know that I am truthful, mister I-bet-you-only-got-your-position-because-you-are-a-woman aka mr manipulative-bitch aka mr if-my-wife-wanted-a-career-after-the-wedding-and-hadn't-told-me-I'd-divorce-her.
You are more truthful than most, but you do mix in a fair amount of BS along with your truth. 

I don't see how the above items make me a "misogynist" ... two pieces of evidence combine to cause me to think the first item ... (a) your demonstrated lack of skill here at science,

I have not demonstrated any "lack of skill here at science" Dave.  I probably haven't demonstrated any skill here either.  This is not a venue for demonstrating scientific skill.  So you have no way of knowing, from this forum, whether I have the required skill to do my job.  Yet you conclude that I have not, and that therefore I owe my post to "playing the woman card" as Trump would put it.

My university, however, disagrees, and they have reason to know, as they actually know my work.



Quote
(b) your stated view that "women should be given more opportunity in the workplace" ...

I think men and women should have equal opportunity in the workplace.  I have no idea where you got the words you have inserted between quotation marks and attributed to me.  If they are indeed my words (and I do not recognise them) please supply context.

Quote
just putting two and two together. 

Nope. You are putting zero and zero together and making more than zero.

Quote
As for the second, marriage is a "deal" ... a contract ... a partnership ... "I plan on doing this, this and this ... you plan on doing that, that and that."  If these things change, then there may need to be a conversation.  If a new agreement cannot be reached, then it might make sense to part ways.  Do you disagree?

Most definitions of marriage do.  Yours may differ.  Jesus's didn't.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 07:02:12 AM
Jekyll: "This is not a venue for demonstrating scientific skill."

Hyde: "Dave sucks at science."

Lol

 I love you guys... I really do!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 07:04:32 AM
Aaaand you just demonstrated you suck at Logic as well.

Although this forum is not a venue for demonstrating Logic skills.

Amazing, innit?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 07:05:22 AM
 Your problem, Lizzie, is not that you want to be queen of the world.  This is a common human tendency.  Your problem is that you don't recognize this tendency in yourself.  I have the same tendency, but at least I recognize it in myself.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 07:09:28 AM
 So I am assuming from your responses that you guys think you have a more righteous view of love and marriage  and marriage vows than I do. 

 So let me ask you... Are there any circumstances under which you would divorce your spouse?   Why or why not?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 07:10:12 AM
Yeah, I'm not sure what Lizzie meant there. Maybe she's referring to this being an Alternative Science forum.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 07:14:09 AM
Jekyll: "This is not a venue for demonstrating scientific skill."

Hyde: "Dave sucks at science."


Well, you do.  That's easy enough to tell.

But if you want to evaluate the scientific skills I used to get my current post, this is not the venue to find it.  You'd need to look at my peer-reviewed publications.  Except that you don't have the scientific skills to evaluate the ones I used.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 07:15:48 AM
So I am assuming from your responses that you guys think you have a more righteous view of love and marriage  and marriage vows than I do. 

 So let me ask you... Are there any circumstances under which you would divorce your spouse?  Why or why not?
When it comes to marriage/love/relationships in general, each person has to decide for themselves whether it is right for them. I'm with Dave on this point. It isn't really anyone's business what other people make of their relationships, unless there are laws being broken.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 07:16:25 AM
Your problem, Lizzie, is not that you want to be queen of the world. 
You are correct.  Wanting to be queen of the world is not a problem I have.


Quote
This is a common human tendency. 
I would agree that not wanting to be queen of the word is a common human tendency.

Quote
Your problem is that you don't recognize this tendency in yourself.
Oh, I recognise easily that wanting  to be queen of the world is not a problem I have.

Quote
I have the same tendency, but at least I recognize it in myself.
I have not seen a great deal of evidence that you wanting to be queen of the world is not your problem.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 07:17:07 AM
Your problem, Lizzie, is not that you want to be queen of the world.  This is a common human tendency.  Your problem is that you don't recognize this tendency in yourself.  I have the same tendency, but at least I recognize it in myself.

You want to be queen of the world?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Photon on June 14, 2016, 07:18:07 AM
Your problem, Lizzie, is not that you want to be queen of the world.  This is a common human tendency.  Your problem is that you don't recognize this tendency in yourself.  I have the same tendency, but at least I recognize it in myself.

But when Dave wants to be Queen of the World it ends up with everybody shitting in a bucket while endorsing pseudoscientific crap like Walt Brown's Hydropants and letting religious bias cloud perception of reality.

Long live Queen Hawkins!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 07:19:13 AM

Yeah, I'm not sure what Lizzie meant there. Maybe she's referring to this being an Alternative Science forum.

I meant that this is not the forum for demonstrating the scientific skills for which I got my current position.  Dave alleges that it must have been because I was a woman that I got my post, because I don't have the scientific skills to have got it on the basis of those.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 07:21:35 AM
Perhaps Dave would like explain just how I, in his view, demonstrated in this forum that I do not have the scientific skills to do my present job, and therefore must have got it because I was a woman.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 07:23:24 AM
Your problem, Lizzie, is not that you want to be queen of the world.  This is a common human tendency.  Your problem is that you don't recognize this tendency in yourself.  I have the same tendency, but at least I recognize it in myself.
Lolwut

"Your problem, Lizzie, is not that you're a ragin' narcissist- I mean, isn't everyone? Your problem is that you don't acknowledge and embrace the fact that you're a raging narcissist- like I do"!

...

It's moments like this one that still make me wonder, after all these years, whether dave is actually trolling us all.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 07:26:16 AM

Yeah, I'm not sure what Lizzie meant there. Maybe she's referring to this being an Alternative Science forum.

I meant that this is not the forum for demonstrating the scientific skills for which I got my current position.  Dave alleges that it must have been because I was a woman that I got my post, because I don't have the scientific skills to have got it on the basis of those.
Ah, thanks. Well I hope this is only a misunderstanding and that Dave doesn't really believe you got your current position because you are a women.

ETA: does he know you have a PhD in science?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 07:26:41 AM
Oh, that's what he meant is it?

Yeah, he seems too narcissistic to see anything other than his own reflected narcissism in others.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 07:27:25 AM

Yeah, I'm not sure what Lizzie meant there. Maybe she's referring to this being an Alternative Science forum.

I meant that this is not the forum for demonstrating the scientific skills for which I got my current position.  Dave alleges that it must have been because I was a woman that I got my post, because I don't have the scientific skills to have got it on the basis of those.
Ah, thanks. Well I hope this is only a misunderstanding and that Dave doesn't really believe you got your current position because you are a women.
tbh I don't think Dave really believes anything.  He just wants things to be true, sometimes temporarily.  This may be a temporary example.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 14, 2016, 07:28:22 AM
Yeah, I'm not sure what Lizzie meant there. Maybe she's referring to this being an Alternative Science forum.
No, she's referring to another Dave thread, in which he pretty categorically stated that if his hypothetical wife, after years of marriage, wanted to pursue a career, he would divorce her, as that wasn't what they'd agreed on in the marriage ceremony. IOW, he'd make no allowance for the fact that people in relationships grow and change over time, especially people who marry young, nor would he support his hypothetical wife's ambitions or needs.

Since this was posted during a period when Dave was feeling extra cranky (pre-goats), he'd recently posted a few quite nasty bits of misogynistic insults to primarily Pingu and me. Let me introduce myself: Manipulative Bitch From Canada at your service.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 07:28:26 AM
Aaaand you just demonstrated you suck at Logic as well.

Although this forum is not a venue for demonstrating Logic skills.

Amazing, innit?
Since you're probably still confused, lemme explain it to you.

A park is not a venue to display one's skill in riding the pogo stick. It's a place for people to go and relax, lay off some steam, watch their kids play, have fun.

But if someone appears in the park, starts trying to ride a pogo stick and keeps falling on his ass, those people will look at him and say "what's that guy doing? He clearly sucks at riding a pogo stick".

Get it?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 07:29:05 AM
So I am assuming from your responses that you guys think you have a more righteous view of love and marriage  and marriage vows than I do. 

 So let me ask you... Are there any circumstances under which you would divorce your spouse?   Why or why not?
Now THAT's something for another thread.

Starting to figure out how this works?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 07:29:26 AM
Your problem, Lizzie, is not that you want to be queen of the world.  This is a common human tendency.  Your problem is that you don't recognize this tendency in yourself.  I have the same tendency, but at least I recognize it in myself.
Lolwut

"Your problem, Lizzie, is not that you're a ragin' narcissist- I mean, isn't everyone? Your problem is that you don't acknowledge and embrace the fact that you're a raging narcissist- like I do"!

...

It's moments like this one that still make me wonder, after all these years, whether dave is actually trolling us all.
More likely he's trolling himself but doesn't know it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 07:33:04 AM
Let me introduce myself: Manipulative Bitch From Canada at your service.
Or, as dave later Dave-inated it, "manipulative fierce lioness protecting her cubs".
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 07:33:26 AM
It's moments like this one that still make me wonder, after all these years, whether dave is actually trolling us all.
I keep telling everyone it's the Real Dave Hawkins Reality Show! So sit back and enjoy.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: thatsneakyguy on June 14, 2016, 07:39:37 AM
People. Get a room. We're busy mocking Dave.
Yabbut I enjoy the fact that Lizzie is capable enough to have a discussion on freewill and also address Dave's illogical ramblings in the same thread.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 08:01:05 AM
Fair point... I didn't mention anything about the past 10,000 years in the thread title.  My bad.

So... Thank you JonF for providing the paper about the Sahara greening up a bit.

Now... Do you want me to start a new thread to ask about greening trends in the last 10,000 years?

Or what?
Depends.  Are you formally acknowledging that there are deserts greening naturally today?

If you start a new thread, be sore to explain in the OP why it matters to anyone.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 08:02:11 AM
Yeah, I'm not sure what Lizzie meant there. Maybe she's referring to this being an Alternative Science forum.
No, she's referring to another Dave thread, in which he pretty categorically stated that if his hypothetical wife, after years of marriage, wanted to pursue a career, he would divorce her, as that wasn't what they'd agreed on in the marriage ceremony. IOW, he'd make no allowance for the fact that people in relationships grow and change over time, especially people who marry young, nor would he support his hypothetical wife's ambitions or needs.

Since this was posted during a period when Dave was feeling extra cranky (pre-goats), he'd recently posted a few quite nasty bits of misogynistic insults to primarily Pingu and me. Let me introduce myself: Manipulative Bitch From Canada at your service.
Thanks. Okay, I see. Yeah, I'm pretty liberal when it comes to people's relationships. It's a very messy business marriage is. My first lasted 31 yrs. I'm quite a bit less tolerant towards misogynistic tenancies though. I could make minor allowances I suppose for certain reasons. So you say Dave was cranky (pre-goats). For some reason this hit me very (LOL) funny. But then it could be, and I'm really speculating here, that having a hypothetical wife that hasn't yet become a real wife could make one temporarily cranky towards women. But you say the goats are real and Dave is better now?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 14, 2016, 08:25:31 AM
The goats appear to be real and Dave seems a little happier, yes, perhaps that is because with the goats he feels he's achieved certain goals., and he's not as openly being an ass to Pingu and me - just the odd condescending remark, as you've seen.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 08:47:55 AM
The goats appear to be real and Dave seems a little happier, yes, perhaps that is because with the goats he feels he's achieved certain goals., and he's not as openly being an ass to Pingu and me - just the odd condescending remark, as you've seen.
Yes, I've seen his condescending remarks here and there, but they seem fairly equitable between men and women. I think maybe the constant mockery getting to him on occasion. Just a guess. And I agree that mockery can be an effective tool in some cases to get a person to look at their own shit.

Maybe (wild speculation here), since you and Pingu are really smart (could be intimidating for us less intelligent folk) combined with possible disappointments with finding the right girl, one might reasonably feel misogynistic tenancies. But if that is true in Dave's case and if it is only temporary, then I think it is inaccurate to label Dave misogynistic.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 08:49:41 AM
Ah, thanks. Well I hope this is only a misunderstanding and that Dave doesn't really believe you got your current position because you are a women.
He did explicitly, unambiguously, write exactly that.

So the only question remaining to you is: "Does Dave really believe what he explicitly, unambiguously, wrote?"

I dunno... maybe it's the clunkiness of this (temporary) forum software... maybe Dave's run out of steam (he's certainly only a shadow to the ankle-biting pit-bull YEC warrior of yesteryear)... but I think the fact that we have a globally (in)famous raging narcissist Dunning Krugerite striding across the global stage - one with real-world influence, real-world followers, real-world consequences - diminishes the draw of Hawkins's side-show clown act. Trump could conceivably become president, where Hawkins is

"...  a real nowhere man
Sitting in his nowhere land
Making all his nowhere plans for nobody"
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 08:54:27 AM
Maybe (wild speculation here), since you and Pingu are really smart (could be intimidating for us less intelligent folk) combined with possible disappointments with finding the right girl, one might reasonably feel misogynistic tenancies. But if that is true in Dave's case and if it is only temporary, then I think it is inaccurate to label Dave misogynistic.
He has also stated that he thinks women should restrict themselves to "traditional roles".
"misogynistic"?
"patriarchal"?
"just part of the fundamentalist Christian package"?

... to me, the terms you choose to describe these views are not really the issue.
The views themselves are abhorrent. 
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 08:56:26 AM
Fair point... I didn't mention anything about the past 10,000 years in the thread title.  My bad.

So... Thank you JonF for providing the paper about the Sahara greening up a bit.

Now... Do you want me to start a new thread to ask about greening trends in the last 10,000 years?

Or what?
Depends.  Are you formally acknowledging that there are deserts greening naturally today?

If you start a new thread, be sore to explain in the OP why it matters to anyone.

I'm still waiting for Bluffy to explain what purpose or relevance of this thread is.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 09:12:04 AM
Ah, thanks. Well I hope this is only a misunderstanding and that Dave doesn't really believe you got your current position because you are a women.
He did explicitly, unambiguously, write exactly that.

So the only question remaining to you is: "Does Dave really believe what he explicitly, unambiguously, wrote?"

I dunno... maybe it's the clunkiness of this (temporary) forum software... maybe Dave's run out of steam (he's certainly only a shadow to the ankle-biting pit-bull YEC warrior of yesteryear)... but I think the fact that we have a globally (in)famous raging narcissist Dunning Krugerite striding across the global stage - one with real-world influence, real-world followers, real-world consequences - diminishes the draw of Hawkins's side-show clown act. Trump could conceivably become president, where Hawkins is

"...  a real nowhere man
Sitting in his nowhere land
Making all his nowhere plans for nobody"

Well, only Dave knows what he believes. Unless he answers this question directly and convincingly, else over time it becomes apparent to me what he believes, I'll have to reserve my judgment on this one.

You say he is a shadow of his former dogmatic self. That could be clunky software, more likely you folks are having an affect on him. Either way, if he is really softening his position, that indicates an ability to learn, to concede a failure. I suppose it remains  explicitly unacknowledged, but in due time he might get there.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 14, 2016, 09:16:17 AM
Your problem, Lizzie, is not that you want to be queen of the world.  This is a common human tendency.  Your problem is that you don't recognize this tendency in yourself.  I have the same tendency, but at least I recognize it in myself.
heh. You'll make a fine queen Dave . That is, as long as you have a strong king to guide you.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 09:16:35 AM
The views themselves are abhorrent. 
Indeed they are.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 14, 2016, 09:17:15 AM
So I am assuming from your responses that you guys think you have a more righteous view of love and marriage  and marriage vows than I do. 

 So let me ask you... Are there any circumstances under which you would divorce your spouse?  Why or why not?
I dunno. I've never divorced a spouse.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 09:22:19 AM
Ahem ... Is there any evidence that there is less desert now than 10,000 years ago?

IOW ... The trend is "more desertification" as time goes on in the last 10,000 years ... Right?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 09:24:49 AM
And if this is the case ... And if desertification is happening today because of deforestation / cropping / overgrazing ... Why would we think that the historical desertification has some different cause?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 14, 2016, 09:27:02 AM
Since this was posted during a period when Dave was feeling extra cranky (pre-goats),
He doesn't need a woman now?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 09:30:12 AM
And if this is the case ... And if desertification is happening today because of deforestation / cropping / overgrazing ... Why would we think that the historical desertification has some different cause?
If forest fires can be caused by cigarette smokers carelessly tossing their lit cigarette butts, why would we think that there is - or ever has been - any other cause of forest fires?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 14, 2016, 09:49:05 AM
Ahem ... Is there any evidence that there is less desert now than 10,000 years ago?

IOW ... The trend is "more desertification" as time goes on in the last 10,000 years ... Right?

Did you not read the posts about the Sahel, in this very thread?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 09:58:44 AM
Ahem ... Is there any evidence that there is less desert now than 10,000 years ago?

Don't know offhand.  Do you have any evidence that is so? Are you admitting that the Sahara appears to be greening up by itself?

Quote
IOW ... The trend is "more desertification" as time goes on in the last 10,000 years ... Right?
Desertification and deserts are not the same thing. Do you have any evidence of increasing formation of deserts?

Why 10,000 years? Why not the 50,000 years of so of 14C dating that you claim represents 4500 calendar years or whatever? Why should anyone give a shit?

What happened to your lush and verdant southeastern Algeria?  If the trend is more desertification over the last 10,000 years then that Eden wouldn't exist.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 10:02:44 AM
.
And if this is the case ... And if desertification is happening today because of deforestation / cropping / overgrazing ... Why would we think that the historical desertification has some different cause?
Partly because we know a lot about how deserts formed and "un-formed" and it isn't deforestation / cropping / overgrazing.  And partly because there is no reason to believe deserts are forming today because of deforestation / cropping / overgrazing.

{ABE} Remember that "desert" is defined by the amount of rainfall, 10-20 inches per year depending on whom you ask.  Got any examples of areas with more than that getting less rainfall because of deforestation / cropping / overgrazing?

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 10:48:05 AM
Ah, thanks. Well I hope this is only a misunderstanding and that Dave doesn't really believe you got your current position because you are a women.
He did explicitly, unambiguously, write exactly that.

So the only question remaining to you is: "Does Dave really believe what he explicitly, unambiguously, wrote?"

I dunno... maybe it's the clunkiness of this (temporary) forum software... maybe Dave's run out of steam (he's certainly only a shadow to the ankle-biting pit-bull YEC warrior of yesteryear)... but I think the fact that we have a globally (in)famous raging narcissist Dunning Krugerite striding across the global stage - one with real-world influence, real-world followers, real-world consequences - diminishes the draw of Hawkins's side-show clown act. Trump could conceivably become president, where Hawkins is

"...  a real nowhere man
Sitting in his nowhere land
Making all his nowhere plans for nobody"

Well, only Dave knows what he believes. Unless he answers this question directly and convincingly, else over time it becomes apparent to me what he believes, I'll have to reserve my judgment on this one.

You say he is a shadow of his former dogmatic self. That could be clunky software, more likely you folks are having an affect on him. Either way, if he is really softening his position, that indicates an ability to learn, to concede a failure. I suppose it remains  explicitly unacknowledged, but in due time he might get there.
I guess you're right, only Bluffy (and The Shawdow) know what's in his mind for sure, but since posting here is voluntary, one would tend to believe what someone posts is what they believe, at least if it's been posted in earnest and repeatedly.

I think you miss Vox's point about Bluffy's performance, he has not softened his stance, it's just he's not as strident and doesn't try as hard. In the good old days, he'd carry on for weeks, months, with the silliest of claims before he'd badger off. Of course, we didn't call it that then, it was either "reboot" or "exciting new business opportunity". Now he pretty much just does drive-bys, uttering a few unsupported claims as he passes by onto another change of subject or new thread.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 10:56:58 AM
Ahem ... Is there any evidence that there is less desert now than 10,000 years ago?

IOW ... The trend is "more desertification" as time goes on in the last 10,000 years ... Right?

Wrong: https://www.google.com/search?q=deserts+that+are+shrinking%5C&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 10:58:18 AM
And if this is the case ... And if desertification is happening today because of deforestation / cropping / overgrazing ... Why would we think that the historical desertification has some different cause?

Oh, I don't know, maybe because humans weren't so numerous and didn't have the current technology.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 14, 2016, 11:05:28 AM
where's the pinhead?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 14, 2016, 11:17:15 AM
I suspect Stevie is waiting for stability.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 12:00:53 PM
I suspect Stevie is waiting for stability.

Nah, he's off on some mountain with a bunch of girl scouts.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 14, 2016, 12:17:06 PM
Hmph. Gadabout.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: thatsneakyguy on June 14, 2016, 12:25:15 PM
The goats appear to be real and Dave seems a little happier, yes, perhaps that is because with the goats he feels he's achieved certain goals., and he's not as openly being an ass to Pingu and me - just the odd condescending remark, as you've seen.

Yes, I've seen his condescending remarks here and there, but they seem fairly equitable between men and women. I think maybe the constant mockery getting to him on occasion. Just a guess. And I agree that mockery can be an effective tool in some cases to get a person to look at their own shit.

Maybe (wild speculation here), since you and Pingu are really smart (could be intimidating for us less intelligent folk) combined with possible disappointments with finding the right girl, one might reasonably feel misogynistic tenancies. But if that is true in Dave's case and if it is only temporary, then I think it is inaccurate to label Dave misogynistic.

Before the old forum crashed Dave singled out Lizzie and reported her for spamming his thread.
There were maybe half a dozen people in the thread asking him the same question over and over and over, but he only reported Lizzie.  It was odd because the other posters would first, ask the question - and then call Dave an idiot or some other insult. 

Lizzie did not insult with her post, but Dave reported her and not the others.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: thatsneakyguy on June 14, 2016, 12:29:00 PM
And if this is the case ... And if desertification is happening today because of deforestation / cropping / overgrazing ... Why would we think that the historical desertification has some different cause?

Hey Dave I have an honest question. 
Do you think deforestation / cropping / overgrazing always cause deserts?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 14, 2016, 12:29:39 PM
Yes. Dave is a monumental dumbass.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 12:33:23 PM
Before the old forum crashed Dave singled out Lizzie and reported her for spamming his thread.
There were maybe half a dozen people in the thread asking him the same question over and over and over, but he only reported Lizzie.  It was odd because the other posters would first, ask the question - and then call Dave an idiot or some other insult. 

Lizzie did not insult with her post, but Dave reported her and not the others.

Okay, thanks. I must admit that really is odd.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: thatsneakyguy on June 14, 2016, 12:47:45 PM
Before the old forum crashed Dave singled out Lizzie and reported her for spamming his thread.
There were maybe half a dozen people in the thread asking him the same question over and over and over, but he only reported Lizzie.  It was odd because the other posters would first, ask the question - and then call Dave an idiot or some other insult. 

Lizzie did not insult with her post, but Dave reported her and not the others.

Okay, thanks. I must admit that really is odd.


Not odd for a misogynist but yeah.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 12:58:47 PM
I guess you're right, only Bluffy (and The Shawdow) know what's in his mind for sure, but since posting here is voluntary, one would tend to believe what someone posts is what they believe, at least if it's been posted in earnest and repeatedly.

I think you miss Vox's point about Bluffy's performance, he has not softened his stance, it's just he's not as strident and doesn't try as hard. In the good old days, he'd carry on for weeks, months, with the silliest of claims before he'd badger off. Of course, we didn't call it that then, it was either "reboot" or "exciting new business opportunity". Now he pretty much just does drive-bys, uttering a few unsupported claims as he passes by onto another change of subject or new thread.
I mean, even based on what you say here, it still seems like a softening of some sort. His heart isn't in it as much. Or perhaps he just doesn't have time for posting anymore. Who but he knows?

Really, I find it difficult to imagine anyone being subjected to the massive amount of logic, reason, facts presented by you folk and that would have no affect. It has to have an affect unless the subject of such a sustained barrage of scientific knowledge could somehow manage to block all of it from entering their mind. Is that even possible?

Everything we come in contact with changes us by some amount. We are all subject to influence by others we interact with. I'm pretty sure all you old-timers like me can recognize how you yourself have changed being influenced by those you associate with. Whatever you can say about Dave he is still only human like the rest of us and likewise subject to change, if perhaps a lot slower than most in accepting that change. It took me a really long time to admit that I could no longer entertain the possibility of god. But now I'm perfectly fine, feeling really liberated. And much of that change I owe to some of you and others like you along the way. So if I haven't said it yet, thank you.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 01:21:29 PM
And if this is the case ... And if desertification is happening today because of deforestation / cropping / overgrazing ... Why would we think that the historical desertification has some different cause?

Hey Dave I have an honest question. 
Do you think deforestation / cropping / overgrazing always cause deserts?
yes
I guess you're right, only Bluffy (and The Shawdow) know what's in his mind for sure, but since posting here is voluntary, one would tend to believe what someone posts is what they believe, at least if it's been posted in earnest and repeatedly.

I think you miss Vox's point about Bluffy's performance, he has not softened his stance, it's just he's not as strident and doesn't try as hard. In the good old days, he'd carry on for weeks, months, with the silliest of claims before he'd badger off. Of course, we didn't call it that then, it was either "reboot" or "exciting new business opportunity". Now he pretty much just does drive-bys, uttering a few unsupported claims as he passes by onto another change of subject or new thread.
I mean, even based on what you say here, it still seems like a softening of some sort. His heart isn't in it as much. Or perhaps he just doesn't have time for posting anymore. Who but he knows?

Really, I find it difficult to imagine anyone being subjected to the massive amount of logic, reason, facts presented by you folk and that would have no affect. It has to have an affect unless the subject of such a sustained barrage of scientific knowledge could somehow manage to block all of it from entering their mind. Is that even possible?

Everything we come in contact with changes us by some amount. We are all subject to influence by others we interact with. I'm pretty sure all you old-timers like me can recognize how you yourself have changed being influenced by those you associate with. Whatever you can say about Dave he is still only human like the rest of us and likewise subject to change, if perhaps a lot slower than most in accepting that change. It took me a really long time to admit that I could no longer entertain the possibility of god. But now I'm perfectly fine, feeling really liberated. And much of that change I owe to some of you and others like you along the way. So if I haven't said it yet, thank you.
[/quote]
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 01:23:50 PM
And if this is the case ... And if desertification is happening today because of deforestation / cropping / overgrazing ... Why would we think that the historical desertification has some different cause?

Hey Dave I have an honest question. 
Do you think deforestation / cropping / overgrazing always cause deserts?
Yes
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 01:26:16 PM
And if this is the case ... And if desertification is happening today because of deforestation / cropping / overgrazing ... Why would we think that the historical desertification has some different cause?

Hey Dave I have an honest question. 
Do you think deforestation / cropping / overgrazing always cause deserts?
Yes
Evidence required. What areas with less than 10 or 20 inches of rain per year have been caused by deforestation / cropping / overgrazing?

Need a hint?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 01:26:35 PM
 The most important change that has occurred in me in the last year or two has been the realization of the depth of darkness in the minds of  scientists working in the life sciences. (and historical geology)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 01:46:47 PM
That's not evidence for your claim. Feeble attempt to change the subject noted.

{ABE} I certainly see no difference between you now and ten years ago.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 02:02:50 PM
I guess you're right, only Bluffy (and The Shawdow) know what's in his mind for sure, but since posting here is voluntary, one would tend to believe what someone posts is what they believe, at least if it's been posted in earnest and repeatedly.

I think you miss Vox's point about Bluffy's performance, he has not softened his stance, it's just he's not as strident and doesn't try as hard. In the good old days, he'd carry on for weeks, months, with the silliest of claims before he'd badger off. Of course, we didn't call it that then, it was either "reboot" or "exciting new business opportunity". Now he pretty much just does drive-bys, uttering a few unsupported claims as he passes by onto another change of subject or new thread.
I mean, even based on what you say here, it still seems like a softening of some sort. His heart isn't in it as much. Or perhaps he just doesn't have time for posting anymore. Who but he knows?

Really, I find it difficult to imagine anyone being subjected to the massive amount of logic, reason, facts presented by you folk and that would have no affect. It has to have an affect unless the subject of such a sustained barrage of scientific knowledge could somehow manage to block all of it from entering their mind. Is that even possible?

Everything we come in contact with changes us by some amount. We are all subject to influence by others we interact with. I'm pretty sure all you old-timers like me can recognize how you yourself have changed being influenced by those you associate with. Whatever you can say about Dave he is still only human like the rest of us and likewise subject to change, if perhaps a lot slower than most in accepting that change. It took me a really long time to admit that I could no longer entertain the possibility of god. But now I'm perfectly fine, feeling really liberated. And much of that change I owe to some of you and others like you along the way. So if I haven't said it yet, thank you.

His heart really isn't in it anymore. He's sort of moved on from saving the world with YEC to saving it by saving agriculture. Sort of turned a new leaf as it were. But where previously he was more motivated by his YECkery, now it seems he's more motivated by his narcissism/DKism. He's a hero now. At least in his own mind.

As to things being changed by what they come in contact with, I can only imagine that you are not familiar with Morton's Demon. It's a concept sort of roughly based upon Maxwell's Demon, it was formulated by Glenn Morton, a fairly well-known OEC/YEC who was also a very successful geologist. Eventually he realized that what he did for a job strongly conflicted with his religious beliefs. And that his work was strongly consistent with reality whereas his religious beliefs required a lot of explanations, contortions, bandages, redefinitions, various colored glasses, etc. So he came up with how that could come about in someone who was clearly quite rational. He suggested Fundamentalists/Literalists had become infected with a demon, one that like in Maxwell's scenario, controlled a gate, and either let in information or held it out. Information which strongly refuted the person's beliefs simply was never seen or if impossible to entirely ignore its existence, was considered to be lies and propaganda and thus could be safely ignored. Information that merely conflicted tangentially was reformatted via redefinition and reinterpretation so it actually supported their beliefs. All other information was confirmed to be supportive.

Bluffy's demon is very strong, his name is YffulB (or evaD to the rest of you). Very little gets past yffulB/evaD.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 02:04:46 PM
The most important change that has occurred in me in the last year or two has been the realization of the depth of darkness in the minds of  scientists working in the life sciences. (and historical geology)
Sorry, I hit the like button and I definitely don't like what you say here, Dave. I mean I'm truly sorry you feel this way. Hey, scientists aren't any different than the rest of us, just educated in a different way. Most are decent enough, some have an attitude problem, I suppose.  It doesn't really matter with science how "dark" their minds are, whatever that is supposed to mean. It's the methods of science that matters. Peer review and all that sort of integrity assurance stuff. Building models then testing them to the breaking point, culling all the failures and repeating the whole process over and over, gradually advancing our knowledge of the world. Science is a machine for harvesting knowledge and culling the crap. It works better than a corn picker, quite well regardless of the darkness of any farmer's mind.

But I'm calling BS on ya. I don't believe what you said there. But if it were true what you said, then I'll have to admit I was wrong about you. Some people maybe never do learn.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 02:18:52 PM
His heart really isn't in it anymore. He's sort of moved on from saving the world with YEC to saving it by saving agriculture. Sort of turned a new leaf as it were. But where previously he was more motivated by his YECkery, now it seems he's more motivated by his narcissism/DKism. He's a hero now. At least in his own mind.

As to things being changed by what they come in contact with, I can only imagine that you are not familiar with Morton's Demon. It's a concept sort of roughly based upon Maxwell's Demon, it was formulated by Glenn Morton, a fairly well-known OEC/YEC who was also a very successful geologist. Eventually he realized that what he did for a job strongly conflicted with his religious beliefs. And that his work was strongly consistent with reality whereas his religious beliefs required a lot of explanations, contortions, bandages, redefinitions, various colored glasses, etc. So he came up with how that could come about in someone who was clearly quite rational. He suggested Fundamentalists/Literalists had become infected with a demon, one that like in Maxwell's scenario, controlled a gate, and either let in information or held it out. Information which strongly refuted the person's beliefs simply was never seen or if impossible to entirely ignore its existence, was considered to be lies and propaganda and thus could be safely ignored. Information that merely conflicted tangentially was reformatted via redefinition and reinterpretation so it actually supported their beliefs. All other information was confirmed to be supportive.

Bluffy's demon is very strong, his name is YffulB (or evaD to the rest of you). Very little gets past yffulB/evaD.
You're pretty good at this, RAFH.  Even better than I thought. I'm getting educated here.  :) I'm not familiar with Morton's Demon, but as you stated it, it makes a lot of sense. And Dave's response to me seems to confirm yffulB/evaD.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 02:21:14 PM
The most important change that has occurred in me in the last year or two has been the realization of the depth of darkness in the minds of  scientists working in the life sciences. (and historical geology)
Your entrenched, unsupported, prejudices becoming even more entrenched hardly counts as a change.
Let alone an "important" one.

In fact, I doubt that I am alone in seeing this as more of the whistling-past-the-graveyard bravado of the Alternative Reality Enthusiast who knows damn well that (a) he can't support his Alternative Reality contentions and (b) cannot answer the countless questions that he pretends not to see.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 02:29:11 PM
The varves of Lake Kälksjön.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 02:55:31 PM
The most important change that has occurred in me in the last year or two has been the realization of the depth of darkness in the minds of  scientists working in the life sciences. (and historical geology)
Sorry, I hit the like button and I definitely don't like what you say here, Dave. I mean I'm truly sorry you feel this way. Hey, scientists aren't any different than the rest of us, just educated in a different way. Most are decent enough, some have an attitude problem, I suppose.  It doesn't really matter with science how "dark" their minds are, whatever that is supposed to mean. It's the methods of science that matters. Peer review and all that sort of integrity assurance stuff. Building models then testing them to the breaking point, culling all the failures and repeating the whole process over and over, gradually advancing our knowledge of the world. Science is a machine for harvesting knowledge and culling the crap. It works better than a corn picker, quite well regardless of the darkness of any farmer's mind.

But I'm calling BS on ya. I don't believe what you said there. But if it were true what you said, then I'll have to admit I was wrong about you. Some people maybe never do learn.
I wish you were correct that science is a machine for reaping the knowledge and culling the crap.  In theory, it is indeed. But in practice it's not because of the biases of human beings.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 02:57:29 PM
His heart really isn't in it anymore. He's sort of moved on from saving the world with YEC to saving it by saving agriculture. Sort of turned a new leaf as it were. But where previously he was more motivated by his YECkery, now it seems he's more motivated by his narcissism/DKism. He's a hero now. At least in his own mind.

As to things being changed by what they come in contact with, I can only imagine that you are not familiar with Morton's Demon. It's a concept sort of roughly based upon Maxwell's Demon, it was formulated by Glenn Morton, a fairly well-known OEC/YEC who was also a very successful geologist. Eventually he realized that what he did for a job strongly conflicted with his religious beliefs. And that his work was strongly consistent with reality whereas his religious beliefs required a lot of explanations, contortions, bandages, redefinitions, various colored glasses, etc. So he came up with how that could come about in someone who was clearly quite rational. He suggested Fundamentalists/Literalists had become infected with a demon, one that like in Maxwell's scenario, controlled a gate, and either let in information or held it out. Information which strongly refuted the person's beliefs simply was never seen or if impossible to entirely ignore its existence, was considered to be lies and propaganda and thus could be safely ignored. Information that merely conflicted tangentially was reformatted via redefinition and reinterpretation so it actually supported their beliefs. All other information was confirmed to be supportive.

Bluffy's demon is very strong, his name is YffulB (or evaD to the rest of you). Very little gets past yffulB/evaD.
You're pretty good at this, RAFH.  Even better than I thought. I'm getting educated here.  :) I'm not familiar with Morton's Demon, but as you stated it, it makes a lot of sense. And Dave's response to me seems to confirm yffulB/evaD.

Some Links : https://www.google.com/search?q=mORTON%27s+demon&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

I'd also direct you to AFDave's Laws of Internet Intercourse. http://atheiststoday.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=1609

Afdave's Laws of Discourse on Internet Discussion Forums

Afdave's First Law: All evidences for evolution are speculative. All speculations for creationism are evidential.

Afdave's Second Law: One may escape intellectual responsibility on any issue merely by stating an intent to pursue it.

Afdave's Third Law: If you have an objection to any point I've raised, I've already addressed it. No, I won't tell you where.

Afdave's Fourth Law: Unanswerable questions are invisible.

Afdave's Fifth Law: The truth of all previously established facts and conclusions are subject to their being convenient to the argument I am presently making.

Afdave's Sixth Law: Any claim AFDave posts on a new discussion board invalidates the refutations of the same claim he has already seen and acknowledged on previous discussion boards.

Afdave's Seventh Law: No matter how transparently pathetic or retarded any of Dave's claims may be they can always be followed by something even more pathetic and retarded.

AFDave's Eighth Law: Any thread where I'm getting my ass handed to me on the original topic can be prolonged indefinitely by the introduction of tangential diversions or an abnormal focus on meaningless minutiae.

AFDave's Ninth Law: A 'troll' is anyone who makes persistent challenges to any of my claims.

AFDave's Law 9(a): A 'blatant troll with a history' is anyone who's been successful at it over the long term.

AFDave's Tenth Law: It's only a quote-mine if I don't use the exact words of the writer, not if I just read his mind and tell you what he really meant.

AFDave's Law 10(b): It is not a quote mine if I am merely quoting someone else's quote mine.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 02:57:41 PM
 I'll give you an example of how it breaks down in practice.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 03:00:17 PM
The most important change that has occurred in me in the last year or two has been the realization of the depth of darkness in the minds of  scientists working in the life sciences. (and historical geology)
Sorry, I hit the like button and I definitely don't like what you say here, Dave. I mean I'm truly sorry you feel this way. Hey, scientists aren't any different than the rest of us, just educated in a different way. Most are decent enough, some have an attitude problem, I suppose.  It doesn't really matter with science how "dark" their minds are, whatever that is supposed to mean. It's the methods of science that matters. Peer review and all that sort of integrity assurance stuff. Building models then testing them to the breaking point, culling all the failures and repeating the whole process over and over, gradually advancing our knowledge of the world. Science is a machine for harvesting knowledge and culling the crap. It works better than a corn picker, quite well regardless of the darkness of any farmer's mind.

But I'm calling BS on ya. I don't believe what you said there. But if it were true what you said, then I'll have to admit I was wrong about you. Some people maybe never do learn.
I wish you were correct that science is a machine for reaping the knowledge and culling the crap.  In theory, it is indeed. But in practice it's not because of the biases of human beings.
Meaningless generalities.
Where, specifically, did science fail?*

*(... and fail subsequently to correct itself).
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 03:02:09 PM
The most important change that has occurred in me in the last year or two has been the realization of the depth of darkness in the minds of  scientists working in the life sciences. (and historical geology)
Sorry, I hit the like button and I definitely don't like what you say here, Dave. I mean I'm truly sorry you feel this way. Hey, scientists aren't any different than the rest of us, just educated in a different way. Most are decent enough, some have an attitude problem, I suppose.  It doesn't really matter with science how "dark" their minds are, whatever that is supposed to mean. It's the methods of science that matters. Peer review and all that sort of integrity assurance stuff. Building models then testing them to the breaking point, culling all the failures and repeating the whole process over and over, gradually advancing our knowledge of the world. Science is a machine for harvesting knowledge and culling the crap. It works better than a corn picker, quite well regardless of the darkness of any farmer's mind.

But I'm calling BS on ya. I don't believe what you said there. But if it were true what you said, then I'll have to admit I was wrong about you. Some people maybe never do learn.
I wish you were correct that science is a machine for reaping the knowledge and culling the crap.  In theory, it is indeed. But in practice it's not because of the biases of human beings.

Actually, you've got that wrong, backwards to be exact. It's those who are not scientifically minded that are most subject to bias, such as yourself.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 03:03:59 PM
 You've probably noticed that I am interested in what I call "sustainable agriculture."  The reason for this is because the decisions we make with respect to agriculture have an enormous effect on the "two organisms" spoken of by Aldo Leopold.

Do you know what those two organisms are?

They are...

1)  The human body, and
2)  The land
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 03:06:44 PM
You've probably noticed that I am interested in what I call "sustainable agriculture."  The reason for this is because the decisions we make with respect to agriculture have an enormous effect on the "two organisms" spoken of by Aldo Leopold.
An author, none of whose books you have ever read.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 03:07:57 PM
 Now most life scientists are working with one or the other of these two organisms.  And both of these organisms are deteriorating as a result of our collective decisions which are  largely controlled by our universities and our life scientists.

I don't know of a more obvious example of the failure of the  practical application of the scientific method.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 03:09:03 PM
Now most life scientists are working with one or the other of these two organisms.  And both of these organisms are deteriorating as a result of our collective decisions which are  largely controlled by our universities and our life scientists.

I don't know of a more obvious example of the failure of the  practical application of the scientific method.
Meaningless generalities?
That's the best you can do in coming up with "examples"?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 03:10:12 PM
 I for one used to believe that "that's just the way it is."

But I no longer believe that  thanks to evidence overlooked by most life scientists.

We CAN feed ourselves sustainably in a way that both heals the body and heals the land.

I am putting together one such program as we speak.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 03:10:54 PM
I'll give you an example of how it breaks down and practice.

AFDave's Eighth Law: Any thread where I'm getting my ass handed to me on the original topic can be prolonged indefinitely by the introduction of tangential diversions or an abnormal focus on meaningless minutiae.

So, which will it be? A pathetic and transparent attempt to claim something you made up is a problem scientists have, or never following through at all?

I'm so excited to find out, I have goosebumps!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 03:11:57 PM
 The fact that most life scientists don't see this is what I mean by "darkness."
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 03:13:23 PM
We CAN feed ourselves sustainably in a way that both heals the body and heals the land.

I am putting together one such program as we speak.
You hope.

But, in fact, your "program" has yet to demonstrate either its capacity to feed so much as a single person OR heal any land.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 14, 2016, 03:14:02 PM
I for one used to believe that "that's just the way it is."

But I no longer believe that  thanks to evidence overlooked by most life scientists.

We CAN feed ourselves sustainably in a way that both heals the body and heals the land.

I am putting together one such program as we speak.
You are a dumbass.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 03:15:01 PM
The fact that most life scientists don't see this is what I mean by "darkness."
Don't see what?
The success of your "program"?
It doesn't exist.
Nothing to do with "darkness".
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 14, 2016, 03:15:34 PM
The fact that most life scientists don't see this is what I mean by "darkness."
I quoted the wrong post. This is the one I meant to quote. It works for the other one too though.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 03:21:07 PM
I wish you were correct that science is a machine for reaping the knowledge and culling the crap.  In theory, it is indeed. But in practice it's not because of the biases of human beings.
As long as you acknowledge that science is a tool, then we can talk.

Yup, you're right that a tool can be misused. Farmer uses her corn picker to pick pepper isn't going to give good results. Same with science. The farmer can take his corn to market, but it won't get sold until it gets closely inspected by others. The same with science. No one "buys" scientific evidence until it gets closely inspected by other scientists. And sure, there are some unscrupulousness farmers out there trying to sell bad corn and some unscrupulousness scientists trying to sell bad science. But surely you realize they are not all bad, not even a majority. The vast majority are reasonably honest. So people can usually trust the produce coming from farms all over because it gets inspected by others and the same is true for science. How can you have spent all these years picking the brains of scientists and not know this?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 03:24:51 PM
I hate this board SW. It's a pain typing on a tablet and if someone posts while you're composing it usually but not always let's you post it. Oh well, hope we don't have to put up with it for long.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 03:27:08 PM
I wish you were correct that science is a machine for reaping the knowledge and culling the crap.  In theory, it is indeed. But in practice it's not because of the biases of human beings.
As long as you acknowledge that science is a tool, then we can talk.

Yup, you're right that a tool can be misused. Farmer uses her corn picker to pick pepper isn't going to give good results. Same with science. The farmer can take his corn to market, but it won't get sold until it gets closely inspected by others. The same with science. No one "buys" scientific evidence until it gets closely inspected by other scientists. And sure, there are some unscrupulousness farmers out there trying to sell bad corn and some unscrupulousness scientists trying to sell bad science. But surely you realize they are not all bad, not even a majority. The vast majority are reasonably honest. So people can usually trust the produce coming from farms all over because it gets inspected by others and the same is true for science. How can you have spent all these years picking the brains of scientists and not know this?

Morton's demon. Very few responses got through, and those that did were shortly forgotten. Sometimes within an hour.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 03:32:11 PM
The fact that most life scientists don't see this is what I mean by "darkness."
I quoted the wrong post. This is the one I meant to quote. It works for the other one too though.

Frankly, Testy, it works for virtually any post by Bluffy.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 03:33:11 PM
I wish you were correct that science is a machine for reaping the knowledge and culling the crap.  In theory, it is indeed. But in practice it's not because of the biases of human beings.
As long as you acknowledge that science is a tool, then we can talk.

Yup, you're right that a tool can be misused. Farmer uses her corn picker to pick pepper isn't going to give good results. Same with science. The farmer can take his corn to market, but it won't get sold until it gets closely inspected by others. The same with science. No one "buys" scientific evidence until it gets closely inspected by other scientists. And sure, there are some unscrupulousness farmers out there trying to sell bad corn and some unscrupulousness scientists trying to sell bad science. But surely you realize they are not all bad, not even a majority. The vast majority are reasonably honest. So people can usually trust the produce coming from farms all over because it gets inspected by others and the same is true for science. How can you have spent all these years picking the brains of scientists and not know this?

The problem is not unscrupulous scientists selling bad science.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 03:34:20 PM

The problem is not unscrupulous scientists selling bad science.
So what's the problem?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 14, 2016, 03:37:05 PM
I hate this board SW. It's a pain typing on a tablet and if someone posts while you're composing it usually but not always let's you post it. Oh well, hope we don't have to put up with it for long.
Jon, under 'Look and Layout' (hover over your name upper right hand corner every page and it's on that menu), you can check a box to not warn of intervening posts. Just scroll down a bit.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 14, 2016, 03:37:21 PM
You've probably noticed that I am interested in what I call "sustainable agriculture."  The reason for this is because the decisions we make with respect to agriculture have an enormous effect on the "two organisms" spoken of by Aldo Leopold.

Do you know what those two organisms are?

They are...

1)  The human body, and
2)  The land
You will be shocked to learn that Leopold was a PhD and is generally considered to be one of the foundational thinkers of an entire branch of life science. Also, it is pretty rich for you to cite him constantly considering that you haven't read his writings even though people have been suggesting you read him for years.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 03:38:20 PM
I wish you were correct that science is a machine for reaping the knowledge and culling the crap.  In theory, it is indeed. But in practice it's not because of the biases of human beings.
As long as you acknowledge that science is a tool, then we can talk.

Yup, you're right that a tool can be misused. Farmer uses her corn picker to pick pepper isn't going to give good results. Same with science. The farmer can take his corn to market, but it won't get sold until it gets closely inspected by others. The same with science. No one "buys" scientific evidence until it gets closely inspected by other scientists. And sure, there are some unscrupulousness farmers out there trying to sell bad corn and some unscrupulousness scientists trying to sell bad science. But surely you realize they are not all bad, not even a majority. The vast majority are reasonably honest. So people can usually trust the produce coming from farms all over because it gets inspected by others and the same is true for science. How can you have spent all these years picking the brains of scientists and not know this?


As you can see, RexT, by the last half dozen posts or so by Bluffy, any question or comment he doesn't like or realizes he can't answer, he ignores.

I posted a whole Google list of hits on "deserts that are shrinking" addressing both the title subject of this thread and the previous thread on the 1970 comment by Anne and Paul Ehrlich. Bluffy didn't even acknowledge it much less address it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 14, 2016, 03:39:11 PM
The fact that most life scientists don't see this is what I mean by "darkness."
I quoted the wrong post. This is the one I meant to quote. It works for the other one too though.

Frankly, Testy, it works for virtually any post by Bluffy.
there is that.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 03:39:42 PM
 The problem is that most scientists are unaware of the data that actually matters so they spend their lives slicing and dicing and analyzing data that doesn't matter.  And they never question the assumptions which give rise to the decline of Leopold's "two organisms" because they are unaware of these assumptions.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 03:40:17 PM
Now most life scientists are working with one or the other of these two organisms.  And both of these organisms are deteriorating as a result of our collective decisions which are  largely controlled by our universities and our life scientists.

I don't know of a more obvious example of the failure of the  practical application of the scientific method.
In case you forgot, Your Highness, the last time you tried to pull that slanderous claim off your ass, you had to eat your words and avoid the subject.

You want it to happen again?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 03:40:45 PM
I wish you were correct that science is a machine for reaping the knowledge and culling the crap.  In theory, it is indeed. But in practice it's not because of the biases of human beings.
As long as you acknowledge that science is a tool, then we can talk.

Yup, you're right that a tool can be misused. Farmer uses her corn picker to pick pepper isn't going to give good results. Same with science. The farmer can take his corn to market, but it won't get sold until it gets closely inspected by others. The same with science. No one "buys" scientific evidence until it gets closely inspected by other scientists. And sure, there are some unscrupulousness farmers out there trying to sell bad corn and some unscrupulousness scientists trying to sell bad science. But surely you realize they are not all bad, not even a majority. The vast majority are reasonably honest. So people can usually trust the produce coming from farms all over because it gets inspected by others and the same is true for science. How can you have spent all these years picking the brains of scientists and not know this?

The problem is not unscrupulous scientists selling bad science.

You're right, it's self-annointed narcissistic DK saviors who don't know shit about shinola who make up or severely pervert problems. Oh, like yourself.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 03:41:42 PM
You've probably noticed that I am interested in what I call "sustainable agriculture."  The reason for this is because the decisions we make with respect to agriculture have an enormous effect on the "two organisms" spoken of by Aldo Leopold.

Do you know what those two organisms are?

They are...

1)  The human body, and
2)  The land
You will be shocked to learn that Leopold was a PhD and is generally considered to be one of the foundational thinkers of an entire branch of life science. Also, it is pretty rich for you to cite him constantly considering that you haven't read his writings even though people have been suggesting you read him for years.
Why do you think this information would shock me? And how many times do I have to explain to you my reading technique?  And why I feel that this reading technique is superior to others?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 03:42:07 PM
The problem is that most scientists are unaware of the data that actually matters so they spend their lives slicing and dicing and analyzing data that doesn't matter.  And they never question the assumptions which give rise to the decline of Leopold's "two organisms" because they are unaware of these assumptions.
One more time:

You have never read a single one of Leopold's books.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 03:42:46 PM
You've probably noticed that I am interested in what I call "sustainable agriculture."  The reason for this is because the decisions we make with respect to agriculture have an enormous effect on the "two organisms" spoken of by Aldo Leopold.

Do you know what those two organisms are?

They are...

1)  The human body, and
2)  The land
You will be shocked to learn that Leopold was a PhD and is generally considered to be one of the foundational thinkers of an entire branch of life science. Also, it is pretty rich for you to cite him constantly considering that you haven't read his writings even though people have been suggesting you read him for years.
Why do you think this information would shock me? And how many times do I have to explain to you my reading technique?  And why I feel that this reading technique is superior to others?

lol

just...

lol
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 03:43:11 PM
The problem is that most scientists are unaware of the data that actually matters so they spend their lives slicing and dicing and analyzing data that doesn't matter.
Says the self-proclaimed  Amateur Scientist Extraordinaire, Dave Hawkins. 
Quote
And they never question the assumptions which give rise to the decline of Leopold's "two organisms" because they are unaware of these assumptions.
Too bad you can't even NAME those "assumptions, or you might have tipped them off. :D

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 03:43:40 PM
The problem is that most scientists are unaware of the data that actually matters so they spend their lives slicing and dicing and analyzing data that doesn't matter.  And they never question the assumptions which give rise to the decline of Leopold's "two organisms" because they are unaware of these assumptions.
But the Great and Powerful Bluffy is.

You really are a joke, Bluffy. But not as good as you used to be. You really need a new schtick.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 03:45:14 PM
I hate this board SW. It's a pain typing on a tablet and if someone posts while you're composing it usually but not always let's you post it. Oh well, hope we don't have to put up with it for long.
Jon, under 'Look and Layout' (hover over your name upper right hand corner every page and it's on that menu), you can check a box to not warn of intervening posts. Just scroll down a bit.
Hover no workee on tablet. I'll get it tomorrow.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 14, 2016, 03:45:37 PM
You've probably noticed that I am interested in what I call "sustainable agriculture."  The reason for this is because the decisions we make with respect to agriculture have an enormous effect on the "two organisms" spoken of by Aldo Leopold.

Do you know what those two organisms are?

They are...

1)  The human body, and
2)  The land
You will be shocked to learn that Leopold was a PhD and is generally considered to be one of the foundational thinkers of an entire branch of life science. Also, it is pretty rich for you to cite him constantly considering that you haven't read his writings even though people have been suggesting you read him for years.
Why do you think this information would shock me? And how many times do I have to explain to you my reading technique?  And why I feel that this reading technique is superior to others?

As has been noted previously, self-evaluation is often one of the least valid forms available. In your case, it's entirely unusable.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 03:46:00 PM
You've probably noticed that I am interested in what I call "sustainable agriculture."  The reason for this is because the decisions we make with respect to agriculture have an enormous effect on the "two organisms" spoken of by Aldo Leopold.

Do you know what those two organisms are?

They are...

1)  The human body, and
2)  The land
You will be shocked to learn that Leopold was a PhD and is generally considered to be one of the foundational thinkers of an entire branch of life science. Also, it is pretty rich for you to cite him constantly considering that you haven't read his writings even though people have been suggesting you read him for years.
Why do you think this information would shock me? And how many times do I have to explain to you my reading technique?  And why I feel that this reading technique is superior to others?
LOL.

Your "reading technique" needs no explanation. And euphemisms are also not necessary. We all know what it is you REALLY do.

As for how you "feel" about your "method's" alleged "superiority", I suppose it has to do with how you also "feel" that your goats are the happiest goats in the fucking Universe.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 03:49:32 PM
The problem is that most scientists are unaware of the data that actually matters so they spend their lives slicing and dicing and analyzing data that doesn't matter.  And they never question the assumptions which give rise to the decline of Leopold's "two organisms" because they are unaware of these assumptions.
This is shameless, ignorant, unsupported calumny.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 14, 2016, 03:51:17 PM
That's never stopped him before.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 03:52:13 PM
Yeah, so I'm ready to acknowledge that everything everyone has told me about Dave seems pretty accurate.

I mean, holy fuck. You aren't making any sense, Dave.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 03:53:27 PM
That's never stopped him before.
Not a reason not to call him on it when he does it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 03:55:58 PM
I wonder if Dave is drunk?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: osmanthus on June 14, 2016, 03:57:28 PM
Yeah, so I'm ready to acknowledge that everything everyone has told me about Dave seems pretty accurate.

I mean, holy fuck. You aren't making any sense, Dave.
Hey, you're getting the hang of this.  :grin:
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 03:57:37 PM
Also Dave, Ctrl-F  is not a "reading technique".  It's a keyboard shortcut.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 03:57:57 PM
Yeah, so I'm ready to acknowledge that everything everyone has told me about Dave seems pretty accurate.

I mean, holy fuck. You aren't making any sense, Dave.
Whatever you say, Dude.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: osmanthus on June 14, 2016, 03:58:07 PM
I hate this board SW. It's a pain typing on a tablet and if someone posts while you're composing it usually but not always let's you post it. Oh well, hope we don't have to put up with it for long.
Jon, under 'Look and Layout' (hover over your name upper right hand corner every page and it's on that menu), you can check a box to not warn of intervening posts. Just scroll down a bit.
Hover no workee on tablet. I'll get it tomorrow.
Hang on and I'll set it for you (adminz can do stuff like that).
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: osmanthus on June 14, 2016, 03:59:20 PM
Jon: should be sorted now.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:02:02 PM
 There are two great examples  that come to mind of scientists ignoring/forgetting huge amounts of important data...

1) Prisca Sapientia
2) Weston Price

(Now  I've really lost Rex lol)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 04:02:13 PM
Yeah, so I'm ready to acknowledge that everything everyone has told me about Dave seems pretty accurate.

I mean, holy fuck. You aren't making any sense, Dave.
Whatever you say, Dude.
Alright then.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:03:27 PM
Jon: should be sorted now.
Can you fix the setting that makes you have to submit every post twice?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: osmanthus on June 14, 2016, 04:05:03 PM
Jon: should be sorted now.
Can you fix the setting that makes you have to submit every post twice?
That's God trying to teach you to think before posting. He works in mysterious ways. It's out of my hands. Praise the Lord.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 04:05:19 PM
There are two great examples  that come to mind of scientists ignoring/forgetting huge amounts of important data...

1) Prisca Sapientia
2) Weston Price

(Now  I've really lost Rex lol)
Yes, you did. I don't know those names. But it doesn't change the fact that you aren't making any sense.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 04:06:56 PM
There are two great examples  that come to mind of scientists ignoring/forgetting huge amounts of important data...

1) Prisca Sapientia
You seem to have a typically IDIOsyncratic davinition of "data"
Quote
2) Weston Price
That's someone's name
Not data
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:07:29 PM
Jon: should be sorted now.
Can you fix the setting that makes you have to submit every post twice?
That's God trying to teach you to think before posting. He works in mysterious ways. It's out of my hands. Praise the Lord.
This is almost as good a zinger as the "let go of your dick" one.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:08:25 PM
There are two great examples  that come to mind of scientists ignoring/forgetting huge amounts of important data...

1) Prisca Sapientia
You seem to have a typically IDIOsyncratic davinition of "data"
Quote
2) Weston Price
That's someone's name
Not data
Very good. Voxrat was one of the brighter bulbs in his class.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:09:46 PM
There are two great examples  that come to mind of scientists ignoring/forgetting huge amounts of important data...

1) Prisca Sapientia
2) Weston Price

(Now  I've really lost Rex lol)
Yes, you did. I don't know those names. But it doesn't change the fact that you aren't making any sense.
OK well just tune in every day. You may catch on eventually.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:10:59 PM
 Maybe Lizzie will explain those two names to you. She has more patience than I do.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 04:14:45 PM
You could give me a list of a thousand names of scientists who fucked up and it wouldn't prove that science isn't a machine for harvesting knowledge. Where do think all the technology comes from, Dave? Science works.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:16:23 PM
You could give me a list of a thousand names of scientists who fucked up and it wouldn't prove that science isn't a machine for harvesting knowledge. Where do think all the technology comes from, Dave? Science works.
Haha ...  You just fell into my trap.  You just did exactly what I've been describing.   See if you can figure out what you did.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 04:19:36 PM
]Haha ...  You just fell into my trap.  You just did exactly what I've been describing.   See if you can figure out what you did.
WTF? I give up, what did I do?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:23:06 PM
You ignored the fact that I was talking about LIFE scientists.

 Of course "general science" or "non-life" science works.  Which is why we have such cool whizbang technology, as you rightly point out.

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 04:23:21 PM
Oh, BTW, you won't get any bragging rights if you fool me. I'm kinda slow. But I'm honest and I can learn. Eventually I will catch on.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 04:25:23 PM

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
Sure, because it's vastly more complex. But otherwise the same principles of science apply.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:25:45 PM
 You ignored or overlooked or forgot about a very small but very key piece of information.

The result?

A cockamamie conclusion.

This  sort of thing is happening every day on a grand scale in the life sciences in our world today.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 04:26:58 PM
Prisca sapienta is ancient woo. Weston Price is a dentist who did some good stuff in the first half of the twentieth century. He was also a very sloppy scientist who was strongly influenced by his preconceptions (like someone). His work has been carried out by modern-day woomeisters.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 04:28:23 PM
Nobody will have failed to notice the complete and utter lack of any specifics in Hawkins's current blather.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:28:32 PM

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
Sure, because it's vastly more complex. But otherwise the same principles of science apply.
"Vastly" ...  Yeah... Like a gazillion times more complex.

In other words, life scientists don't have a fucking clue how life works (relatively speaking) Which is why they are fucking it up on such a grand scale.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:30:57 PM
 Prisca Sapientia is the reason that Kepler, Copernicus, Gallileo, and Newton (and Weston Price come to think of it) were able to rediscover the things that they did.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 04:32:25 PM
Jon: should be sorted now.
Manipulative bitch!
:grin:

Thanks. 

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 04:34:46 PM
You ignored or overlooked or forgot about a very small but very key piece of information.

The result?

A cockamamie conclusion.

This  sort of thing is happening every day on a grand scale in the life sciences in our world today.
No he didn't.  He made an excellent point, which flew right over your head.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 04:37:46 PM

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
Sure, because it's vastly more complex. But otherwise the same principles of science apply.
"Vastly" ...  Yeah... Like a gazillion times more complex.

In other words, life scientists don't have a fucking clue how life works (relatively speaking) Which is why they are fucking it up on such a grand scale.
Okay, fine. So we learn by our mistakes and eventually we make some progress. That's how science works. But modern medicine and the things known about say genetics is big progress. You must agree. So what is your point?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 04:38:04 PM

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
Sure, because it's vastly more complex. But otherwise the same principles of science apply.
"Vastly" ...  Yeah... Like a gazillion times more complex.

In other words, life scientists don't have a fucking clue how life works (relatively speaking) Which is why they are fucking it up on such a grand scale.
Yes, they have lots of clues.  And "they" are not "fucking it up on such a grand scale", if by "they" you mean life scientists in general.  In fact, I'd say that life scientists are mostly doing a pretty good job in trying to point out just how giant industrial corporations are "fucking it up on such a grand scale", and in finding out how we might arrest and ameliorate the fuck up.

But you don't know about any of this, because you don't want to, because it doesn't fit your preferred narrative.  So you slander them instead.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 14, 2016, 04:39:17 PM
Prisca Sapientia is the reason that Kepler, Copernicus, Gallileo, and Newton (and Weston Price come to think of it) were able to rediscover the things that they did.


No it isn't.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: osmanthus on June 14, 2016, 04:40:35 PM
You ignored the fact that I was talking about LIFE scientists.

 Of course "general science" or "non-life" science works.
Oh bonzer. So you have absolutely no argument with the conclusions of mainstream geology and radiometric dating then? Good to know.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 04:40:54 PM
Prisca Sapientia is the reason that Kepler, Copernicus, Gallileo, and Newton (and Weston Price come to think of it) were able to rediscover the things that they did.

Complete.
Bull.
Shit.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:42:06 PM

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
Sure, because it's vastly more complex. But otherwise the same principles of science apply.
"Vastly" ...  Yeah... Like a gazillion times more complex.

In other words, life scientists don't have a fucking clue how life works (relatively speaking) Which is why they are fucking it up on such a grand scale.
Okay, fine. So we learn by our mistakes and eventually we make some progress. That's how science works. But modern medicine and the things known about say genetics is big progress. You must agree. So what is your point?
I agree that HEROIC medicine is great.  But we wouldn't need heroic medicine nearly as often if we would back up and get humble and realize that  mother nature is a hell of a lot smarter than we gave her credit for.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 14, 2016, 04:42:49 PM
So I am assuming from your responses that you guys think you have a more righteous view of love and marriage  and marriage vows than I do. 

 So let me ask you... Are there any circumstances under which you would divorce your spouse?  Why or why not?
Righteous?
You do know that that is a foul word, right?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: osmanthus on June 14, 2016, 04:43:12 PM
You ignored the fact that I was talking about LIFE scientists.

 Of course "general science" or "non-life" science works.  Which is why we have such cool whizbang technology, as you rightly point out.

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
MWAHAHAHAHA! You fell for it! You fell into our evil Darwinista conspiracy Satan-worshipping trap! You ignored the fact that "general science" and "non-life science" includes lotsa stuff that totally screws YEC nine ways to hell!

So there.

Fuckwit. :P
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 14, 2016, 04:43:46 PM

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
Sure, because it's vastly more complex. But otherwise the same principles of science apply.
"Vastly" ...  Yeah... Like a gazillion times more complex.

In other words, life scientists don't have a fucking clue how life works (relatively speaking) Which is why they are fucking it up on such a grand scale.
Okay, fine. So we learn by our mistakes and eventually we make some progress. That's how science works. But modern medicine and the things known about say genetics is big progress. You must agree. So what is your point?
I agree that HEROIC medicine is great.  But we wouldn't need heroic medicine nearly as often if we would back up and get humble and realize that  mother nature is a hell of a lot smarter than we gave her credit for.

She is also good at killing people.
We are not anything special in the grand scheme of things.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 04:44:06 PM

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
Sure, because it's vastly more complex. But otherwise the same principles of science apply.
"Vastly" ...  Yeah... Like a gazillion times more complex.

In other words, life scientists don't have a fucking clue how life works (relatively speaking) Which is why they are fucking it up on such a grand scale.
Okay, fine. So we learn by our mistakes and eventually we make some progress. That's how science works. But modern medicine and the things known about say genetics is big progress. You must agree. So what is your point?
I agree that HEROIC medicine is great.  But we wouldn't need heroic medicine nearly as often if we would back up and get humble and realize that  mother nature is a hell of a lot smarter than we gave her credit for.
Still no specifics.
There's a reason for that.

You're not fooling anyone.
Except - possibly - yourself. But I doubt even that.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:44:34 PM
 For example, farmers like me in the restoration agriculture movement can produce food while enhancing ecosystems rather than destroying them.  And we can do it with no inputs like grain  which are produced by  destructive agriculture.  And without meds like wormers  and antibiotics and vaccinations which are also destructive.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 14, 2016, 04:45:56 PM
You ignored the fact that I was talking about LIFE scientists.

 Of course "general science" or "non-life" science works.  Which is why we have such cool whizbang technology, as you rightly point out.

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.

It is still looking for evidence of being wrong.
Looking for evidence of being right, is marketing whether you are talking about life or anything.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: osmanthus on June 14, 2016, 04:46:32 PM
For example, farmers like me in the restoration agriculture movement...
Yippee! Dave has bought two goats!

:slowclap:
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 14, 2016, 04:46:59 PM
For example, farmers like me in the restoration agriculture movement can produce food while enhancing ecosystems rather than destroying them.  And we can do it with no inputs like grain  which are produced by  destructive agriculture.  And without meds like wormers  and antibiotics and vaccinations which are also destructive.

So far  you are more a planner than a farmer.
Heck I probably harvested more food before puberty than you have in your whole life.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 04:47:06 PM
For example, farmers like me in the restoration agriculture movement can produce food while enhancing ecosystems rather than destroying them.  And we can do it with no inputs like grain  which are produced by  destructive agriculture.  And without meds like wormers  and antibiotics and vaccinations which are also destructive.
lol

Remember your attempt to grow a tomato plant?
How you ended up nuking it with Sevin?

lol
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 04:48:34 PM

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
Sure, because it's vastly more complex. But otherwise the same principles of science apply.
"Vastly" ...  Yeah... Like a gazillion times more complex.

In other words, life scientists don't have a fucking clue how life works (relatively speaking) Which is why they are fucking it up on such a grand scale.
Okay, fine. So we learn by our mistakes and eventually we make some progress. That's how science works. But modern medicine and the things known about say genetics is big progress. You must agree. So what is your point?
I agree that HEROIC medicine is great.  But we wouldn't need heroic medicine nearly as often if we would back up and get humble and realize that  mother nature is a hell of a lot smarter than we gave her credit for.

She is also good at killing people.
We are not anything special in the grand scheme of things.

Oh yes we are.  And thankfully a few rare souls working in the life sciences - guys like Michael Denton - recognize that we are.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 14, 2016, 04:54:33 PM

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
Sure, because it's vastly more complex. But otherwise the same principles of science apply.
"Vastly" ...  Yeah... Like a gazillion times more complex.

In other words, life scientists don't have a fucking clue how life works (relatively speaking) Which is why they are fucking it up on such a grand scale.
Okay, fine. So we learn by our mistakes and eventually we make some progress. That's how science works. But modern medicine and the things known about say genetics is big progress. You must agree. So what is your point?
I agree that HEROIC medicine is great.  But we wouldn't need heroic medicine nearly as often if we would back up and get humble and realize that  mother nature is a hell of a lot smarter than we gave her credit for.

She is also good at killing people.
We are not anything special in the grand scheme of things.

Oh yes we are.  And thankfully a few rare souls working in the life sciences - guys like Michael Denton - recognize that we are.

What evidence did you have BEFORE you reached that conclusion?
Any evidence of it at all?
Remember,evidence from BEFORE you reached that conclusion.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 04:57:01 PM
What evidence did you have BEFORE you reached that conclusion?
Any evidence of it at all?
Remember,evidence from BEFORE you reached that conclusion.
He has no evidence at all. Before OR after he reached that conclusion.
He just typed out  someone's name.
He has no evidence.

I don't think he knows the difference.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 04:58:10 PM
I agree that HEROIC medicine is great.  But we wouldn't need heroic medicine nearly as often if we would back up and get humble and realize that  mother nature is a hell of a lot smarter than we gave her credit for.
Let's see, I can throw in brain science. There is a lot of progress there. Sorry if some scientists were wrong for a long time before they were right.

Anyway, nature is "smart", sure. And I'd be willing to wager that plenty scientists are looking to nature for answers. How much credit do you give to a system if you don't know the complete scope of the system? Fuck if I know how much credit to give nature. Do you know? Fuck if I know how much credit to give to you. You haven't actually impressed me in any sort of way yet. Maybe I'll stay tuned to the Real Dave Hawkins Reality Show and find out.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 05:10:28 PM
 The question of "how much credit do I give nature" is where being a creationist leaves the competition (non-creationists) in the dust.   Most life scientists are not giving Mother Nature anywhere near enough credit  because they think life came about from a dumb, blind process which -  at the bottom of it - is why they insult her with things like DDT and antibiotics and vaccinations.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 05:10:35 PM

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
Sure, because it's vastly more complex. But otherwise the same principles of science apply.
"Vastly" ...  Yeah... Like a gazillion times more complex.

In other words, life scientists don't have a fucking clue how life works (relatively speaking) Which is why they are fucking it up on such a grand scale.
Okay, fine. So we learn by our mistakes and eventually we make some progress. That's how science works. But modern medicine and the things known about say genetics is big progress. You must agree. So what is your point?
He thinks anything other than "heroic medicine" when required is bullshit. Eat a "Price diet" (which is whatever Dave feels like that day) and you'll never get sick and any dental problems will be cured. Bacteria and viruses wouldn't be dangerous if we hadn't pissed them off somehow.

Need I add that he's fanatically ant-vax.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 05:13:17 PM
The question of "how much credit do I give nature" is where being a creationist leaves the competition (non-creationists) in the dust.  
How do you quantify "leaves in the dust"?
Number of lives saved?
Number of illnesses  prevented?
Number of peer-reviewed publications?
Number of citations by other scientists in peer-reviewed publications?

:dunno:
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 05:13:30 PM
For example, farmers like me in the restoration agriculture movement can produce food while enhancing ecosystems rather than destroying them.  And we can do it with no inputs like grain  which are produced by  destructive agriculture.  And without meds like wormers  and antibiotics and vaccinations which are also destructive.

So far  you are more a planner than a farmer.
Heck I probably harvested more food before puberty than you have in your whole life.

I wouldn't call it planning. It's ADD on steroids, a different "plan" each week.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 05:14:35 PM
 We do not need things like DDT or round up or antibiotics or vaccinations in our world.  What we need is to live in accordance with nature's principles.  And I don't say that while
armchair quarterbacking in plush, air-conditioned luxury.  I say it from the sweaty trenches of reality.  I'm eating my own cooking.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 14, 2016, 05:17:42 PM
The question of "how much credit do I give nature" is where being a creationist leaves the competition (non-creationists) in the dust.   Most life scientists are not giving Mother Nature anywhere near enough credit  because they think life came about from a dumb, blind process which -  at the bottom of it - is why they insult her with things like DDT and antibiotics and vaccinations.
But Dave it is built on lies.
My being able to fly means that I can travel faster than you can.

Dave put your beliefs to a very simple test.
Do the flood legends of the Wai Wai tribe fit with the Biblical account of the Bible?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 05:18:51 PM
We do not need things like DDT or round up or antibiotics or vaccinations in our world.  What we need is to live in accordance with nature's principles.  And I don't say that while
armchair quarterbacking in plush, air-conditioned luxury.  I say it from the sweaty trenches of reality.  I'm eating my own cooking.
lol
How bold!
I'm sure you must be the only one here who cooks (some of) the food he eats.
One good thing Hawkins reliably contributes: making self-righteousness look even more ridiculous than it would otherwise.

Meanwhile:  you've never taken any antibiotics?
And you've never been vaccinated?

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 14, 2016, 05:19:34 PM
We do not need things like DDT or round up or antibiotics or vaccinations in our world.  What we need is to live in accordance with nature's principles.  And I don't say that while
armchair quarterbacking in plush, air-conditioned luxury.  I say it from the sweaty trenches of reality.  I'm eating my own cooking.

Nature's principals give men a weak spot in the abdominal wall.
Nature's principals killed a lot of people with small pox.

Dave show some evidence that stands on its own.
Throw out what does not, and you will no longer be a creationist.
But to do otherwise is to shun the Truth,
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 14, 2016, 05:27:33 PM
Nature's principals give men a weak spot in the abdominal wall.
Heh.
I've had hernia repair surgery on both sides now.
I wonder...
Does that qualify as "heroic" medicine?
Could I have avoided hernias (or maybe cured them!) if only I had eaten The Correct Price (ish!) diet?

Such a buffoon.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 14, 2016, 05:35:37 PM
Nature's principals give men a weak spot in the abdominal wall.
Heh.
I've had hernia repair surgery on both sides now.
I wonder...
Does that qualify as "heroic" medicine?
Could I have avoided hernias (or maybe cured them!) if only I had eaten The Correct Price (ish!) diet?

Such a buffoon.


You probably could have avoided hernias if you had been made by a God that puts testicles on the side of the wall where he wants them to end up.
I think everyone has seen a TV show or movie where someone builds something like a boat and then discovers they can't get it out the door.
Do Creationists really think that God is that stupid?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 05:44:05 PM
For example, farmers like me in the restoration agriculture movement can produce food while enhancing ecosystems rather than destroying them.  And we can do it with no inputs like grain  which are produced by  destructive agriculture.  And without meds like wormers  and antibiotics and vaccinations which are also destructive.
Okay, so I think I may have spotted what you are doing wrong here, Mr. Dave sir.

But first I want to agree with you on sustainable agriculture--it's called organic gardening. One of my favorite quotes from a book I read on the subject paraphrased "No one ever fertilized an old growth forest. They didn't have to". But unfortunately for you and me, (I tried my hand at it for a good spell, hell yes I did) it requires the assistance of a micro biologist if a farmer really wants to be successful at it. Yeah, I failed at it pretty badly, so I turned back to using chemical nutrients.

And that brings me to what you are doing wrong. You got the wrong guy. The scientist isn't the enemy of sustainable agriculture. The actual enemy you are looking for is corporate greed. And bear in mind that most scientists work for private corporations. You got the wrong guy because you think that scientists are in complete control of science, but they are not. Scientists have to support their families and that money comes from either grants or usually from corporations. While scientists are in control of how the science machine works, they are not generally in control of where or how the science machine gets applied in the real world. Corporations are mostly in control of how science is applied. Chemical Corporations that produce fertilizer and pesticides, etc. see organic gardening as their mortal enemy. They have little or no interest in the science of organic gardening.

So who do you think does have an interest in organic gardening? The answer must be farmers and the people who eat their produce because it sure as hell isn't the chemical corporations. You can try organic gardening on your own, as I did, but if you are successful it is by the sheerest of luck. In order for organic gardening to reach it's potential, and a vast potential it has, it will require first the help of scientists with PhDs in microbiology. And second the political will to defeat corporate greed. Get the right guy, Mr. Dave and acquit the friendly scientists who find ways to work where they can practice their science in a manner that helps the people instead of the greedy corporations. Figure out who your friends are Dave and who your enemies are. You got the wrong guy.

ETA: the book I refereed to is "Teaming with Microbes" (Jeff Lowenfels and Wayne Lewis)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 14, 2016, 06:01:44 PM
Quote
"No one ever fertilized an old growth forest.".
Humans, not so much. Millions of animals, from tiny worms to mice and birds to skunks and deer do. Did you know dust storms from Africa fertilise the Amazon?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 14, 2016, 06:04:21 PM
You've probably noticed that I am interested in what I call "sustainable agriculture."  The reason for this is because the decisions we make with respect to agriculture have an enormous effect on the "two organisms" spoken of by Aldo Leopold.

Do you know what those two organisms are?

They are...

1)  The human body, and
2)  The land
You will be shocked to learn that Leopold was a PhD and is generally considered to be one of the foundational thinkers of an entire branch of life science. Also, it is pretty rich for you to cite him constantly considering that you haven't read his writings even though people have been suggesting you read him for years.
Why do you think this information would shock me? And how many times do I have to explain to you my reading technique?  And why I feel that this reading technique is superior to others?
You are such a dumbass.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 14, 2016, 06:05:18 PM
The problem is that most scientists are unaware of the data that actually matters so they spend their lives slicing and dicing and analyzing data that doesn't matter.  And they never question the assumptions which give rise to the decline of Leopold's "two organisms" because they are unaware of these assumptions.
dear god could you be any stupider?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 14, 2016, 06:28:06 PM
The problem is that most scientists are unaware of the data that actually matters so they spend their lives slicing and dicing and analyzing data that doesn't matter.  And they never question the assumptions which give rise to the decline of Leopold's "two organisms" because they are unaware of these assumptions.
dear god could you be any stupider?
The problem is that most scientists are unaware of the data that actually matters so they spend their lives slicing and dicing and analyzing data that doesn't matter.  And they never question the assumptions which give rise to the decline of Leopold's "two organisms" because they are unaware of these assumptions.
dear god could you be any stupider?
Yes.

It's one of the laws.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 06:42:31 PM
The question of "how much credit do I give nature" is where being a creationist leaves the competition (non-creationists) in the dust.  Most life scientists are not giving Mother Nature anywhere near enough credit  because they think life came about from a dumb, blind process which -  at the bottom of it - is why they insult her with things like DDT and antibiotics and vaccinations.
Well holy shit fucking damn all mighty and bitch to the mother fucking bastard. Sorry, I just had to cuss for a second there. That's how I do it when I get left in the dust, you see.

I ain't buying what you're selling. I'm a bushiness man, Dave. You can keep your snake oil for yourself. If we are done with your fairy tale dustings, can we get back to reality Mr Dave. After all I'm trying to get this show off the ground and I can't do that with the Real Dave Hawkins Make-believe Show. It's a reality show or the deal is off.

Anyway, you got the wrong guys.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 06:53:37 PM
Quote
"No one ever fertilized an old growth forest.".
Humans, not so much. Millions of animals, from tiny worms to mice and birds to skunks and deer do. Did you know dust storms from Africa fertilise the Amazon?
Well, sure those things contribute to the "soil food web", but the real magic happens because of the microbes. The animal droppings only help feed the microbes. It is the microbes that feed the plants. Chemical fertilizer kills the microbes while it directly feeds the plants which forced farmers to become dependent on ever greater quantities of the chemical. It wouldn't be the dust storms but the beneficial microbes in the dust that does the feeding.

ETA: perhaps trace elements in the dust too.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 07:40:15 PM
You've probably noticed that I am interested in what I call "sustainable agriculture."  The reason for this is because the decisions we make with respect to agriculture have an enormous effect on the "two organisms" spoken of by Aldo Leopold.

Do you know what those two organisms are?

They are...

1)  The human body, and
2)  The land
You will be shocked to learn that Leopold was a PhD and is generally considered to be one of the foundational thinkers of an entire branch of life science. Also, it is pretty rich for you to cite him constantly considering that you haven't read his writings even though people have been suggesting you read him for years.
Why do you think this information would shock me? And how many times do I have to explain to you my reading technique?  And why I feel that this reading technique is superior to others?
You are such a dumbass.

(https://healthnutornot.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/princess-bride-you-keep-using-that-word1.gif)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 14, 2016, 07:52:30 PM
For example, farmers like me in the restoration agriculture movement can produce food while enhancing ecosystems rather than destroying them.  And we can do it with no inputs like grain  which are produced by  destructive agriculture.  And without meds like wormers  and antibiotics and vaccinations which are also destructive.
Okay, so I think I may have spotted what you are doing wrong here, Mr. Dave sir.

But first I want to agree with you on sustainable agriculture--it's called organic gardening. One of my favorite quotes from a book I read on the subject paraphrased "No one ever fertilized an old growth forest. They didn't have to". But unfortunately for you and me, (I tried my hand at it for a good spell, hell yes I did) it requires the assistance of a micro biologist if a farmer really wants to be successful at it. Yeah, I failed at it pretty badly, so I turned back to using chemical nutrients.

And that brings me to what you are doing wrong. You got the wrong guy. The scientist isn't the enemy of sustainable agriculture. The actual enemy you are looking for is corporate greed. And bear in mind that most scientists work for private corporations. You got the wrong guy because you think that scientists are in complete control of science, but they are not. Scientists have to support their families and that money comes from either grants or usually from corporations. While scientists are in control of how the science machine works, they are not generally in control of where or how the science machine gets applied in the real world. Corporations are mostly in control of how science is applied. Chemical Corporations that produce fertilizer and pesticides, etc. see organic gardening as their mortal enemy. They have little or no interest in the science of organic gardening.

So who do you think does have an interest in organic gardening? The answer must be farmers and the people who eat their produce because it sure as hell isn't the chemical corporations. You can try organic gardening on your own, as I did, but if you are successful it is by the sheerest of luck. In order for organic gardening to reach it's potential, and a vast potential it has, it will require first the help of scientists with PhDs in microbiology. And second the political will to defeat corporate greed. Get the right guy, Mr. Dave and acquit the friendly scientists who find ways to work where they can practice their science in a manner that helps the people instead of the greedy corporations. Figure out who your friends are Dave and who your enemies are. You got the wrong guy.

ETA: the book I refereed to is "Teaming with Microbes" (Jeff Lowenfels and Wayne Lewis)
Organic gardening is a nice (small) part of sustainable agriculture but the real heavy duty sustainable agriculture - the part that is really going to produce the majority of the food calories - is managing "flerds" in restored savannas (Mark Shepard).  I'm talking about "flerds" consisting of cattle, sheep, goats, chickens, turkeys, ducks, hogs and even elephants and giraffes all in a single group, bunched and constantly on the move to simulate what predators do in Nature.

Scientists are somewhat culpable in my opinion because they could quit their science career serving the greedy bastard corporations and start doing something which is useful to humanity. 

As for this ... "In order for organic gardening to reach it's potential, and a vast potential it has, it will require first the help of scientists with PhDs in microbiology" ... I disagree.  I think that all it takes is a willingness to study the Book of Nature and follow her rules.  I have not mastered that myself yet, but I'm getting there.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 14, 2016, 08:12:06 PM
Quote
Organic gardening is a nice (small) part of sustainable agriculture but the real heavy duty sustainable agriculture - the part that is really going to produce the majority of the food calories - is managing "flerds" in restored savannas (Mark Shepard).  I'm talking about "flerds" consisting of cattle, sheep, goats, chickens, turkeys, ducks, hogs and even elephants and giraffes all in a single group, bunched and constantly on the move to simulate what predators do in Nature.
You should know by now that is NOT how predator-prey relationships work, it is NOT how animals graze, and some of those animals are NOT compatible in mixed company.

Do these grazing caribou look bunched and constantly moving to you?

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/09/23/business/caribou/caribou-blogSpan.jpg)

You know virtually nothing of animal behaviour, as is evident from your current practice of keeping your goats in a tiny cage. You certainly know nothing about predator behaviours, and nothing about the real methods prey animals use to defend against predators.

Mark Shepard is not a magic word.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 14, 2016, 08:15:20 PM
What is the "Book of Nature"?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 14, 2016, 09:38:10 PM
Quote from: the dumbass dave
I think that all it takes is a willingness to study the Book of Nature and follow her rules.  I have not mastered that myself yet, but I'm getting there.

No you aren't. You'll be lucky to achieve 19th century technology. You literally have no idea what you are doing. You paid a rancher to learn gardening and a gardener to learn ranching. You are as stupid of a dumbass as I've ever seen. The idea that you ever learned anything about 'nature' is blasphemy against the true gods.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Photon on June 14, 2016, 10:11:42 PM
Damn this thread is hilarious!  Keep tilting at those windmills, Dave.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 15, 2016, 12:35:35 AM
Quote
"No one ever fertilized an old growth forest.".
Humans, not so much. Millions of animals, from tiny worms to mice and birds to skunks and deer do. Did you know dust storms from Africa fertilise the Amazon?
heh

Yes, he does.

What he doesn't know is what "fertilize" means.  I keep asking him, but he won't say.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 15, 2016, 12:36:14 AM
[duplicate]
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 03:00:02 AM
What is the "Book of Nature"?
A cute way to say "Nature"
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 03:01:33 AM
Quote from: the dumbass dave
I think that all it takes is a willingness to study the Book of Nature and follow her rules.  I have not mastered that myself yet, but I'm getting there.

No you aren't. You'll be lucky to achieve 19th century technology. You literally have no idea what you are doing. You paid a rancher to learn gardening and a gardener to learn ranching. You are as stupid of a dumbass as I've ever seen. The idea that you ever learned anything about 'nature' is blasphemy against the true gods.
"You paid a rancher to learn gardening and a gardener to learn ranching."

Now THAT'S funny. 
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 03:09:22 AM
Quote
"No one ever fertilized an old growth forest.".
Humans, not so much. Millions of animals, from tiny worms to mice and birds to skunks and deer do. Did you know dust storms from Africa fertilise the Amazon?
heh

Yes, he does.

What he doesn't know is what "fertilize" means.  I keep asking him, but he won't say.
"Fertilize" (plants) means "feed" or "make food available" to plants.  Patricia Richardson talks about doing this the organic way in this Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKqHNzWxek  She says that humans have a C/N ratio of about 30:1, nematodes are about 15:1 and bacteria are only 5:1 ... so she says that having lots of bacteria in your soil is how you get lots of nitrogen in your soil.  BUT ... the nitrogen in soil bacteris is not AVAILABLE to plants.  So God created a neat little creature called a protozoan which runs around all day eating bacteria and ...

... pooping out the perfect form of nitrogen for plants.

I'm sure a similar conversation could be had for potassium and phosphorus and all the trace minerals needed for plants.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 03:11:14 AM
And IIRC I think I've read that soil tests cannot detect this form of nitrogen in the soil.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 15, 2016, 03:49:59 AM
Organic gardening is a nice (small) part of sustainable agriculture but the real heavy duty sustainable agriculture - the part that is really going to produce the majority of the food calories - is managing "flerds" in restored savannas (Mark Shepard).  I'm talking about "flerds" consisting of cattle, sheep, goats, chickens, turkeys, ducks, hogs and even elephants and giraffes all in a single group, bunched and constantly on the move to simulate what predators do in Nature.
Organic gardening is the key to sustainable agriculture. Humans and flurds both need plants for our survival. Most farmers today use chemical fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides to grow plants. That works just fine until the chemicals kill the soil food web. A healthy sustainable soil is alive, teaming with microbes. It is the beneficial microbes that form a symbiotic relationship with plants and feed the plants. That is why no one ever fertilized an old growth forest.
Quote
Scientists are somewhat culpable in my opinion because they could quit their science career serving the greedy bastard corporations and start doing something which is useful to humanity.
Oh scientists have been doing useful things for humanity all along. But again it is not up to scientists to decide which science gets done. It is the corporations and the government who decide that, at least for the most part.

Quote
As for this ... "In order for organic gardening to reach it's potential, and a vast potential it has, it will require first the help of scientists with PhDs in microbiology" ... I disagree.  I think that all it takes is a willingness to study the Book of Nature and follow her rules.  I have not mastered that myself yet, but I'm getting there.
You disagree because you don't understand what organic gardening actually is. It isn't as simple as putting animal droppings in the soil. That can work if you are lucky. But to really build a healthy soil food web requires vast knowledge in microbiology. The soil food web is very complex. Some microbes are bad for plants, others are beneficial. Getting the right balance between those two is not easy to do.

Okay, so I find it strange that you have a willingness to study what you call the "Book of Nature", which you say is a cute way of saying nature. Lets see, people who study nature are called biologists and biologists are scientists and you don't seem to have much respect for scientists. That's pretty fucked up.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 15, 2016, 04:12:25 AM
Quote
"No one ever fertilized an old growth forest.".
Humans, not so much. Millions of animals, from tiny worms to mice and birds to skunks and deer do. Did you know dust storms from Africa fertilise the Amazon?
heh

Yes, he does.

What he doesn't know is what "fertilize" means.  I keep asking him, but he won't say.
"Fertilize" (plants) means "feed" or "make food available" to plants.  Patricia Richardson talks about doing this the organic way in this Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKqHNzWxek  She says that humans have a C/N ratio of about 30:1, nematodes are about 15:1 and bacteria are only 5:1 ... so she says that having lots of bacteria in your soil is how you get lots of nitrogen in your soil.  BUT ... the nitrogen in soil bacteris is not AVAILABLE to plants.  So God created a neat little creature called a protozoan which runs around all day eating bacteria and ...

... pooping out the perfect form of nitrogen for plants.

I'm sure a similar conversation could be had for potassium and phosphorus and all the trace minerals needed for plants.
And what is that "form of nitrogen", Dave?



Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 04:37:11 AM
Organic gardening is NOT the key to sustainable agriculture, if by "organic gardening" you mean growing things such as the typical home gardener grows such as tomatoes and carrots and lettuce and such for the simple reason that the typical home garden does not supply nearly enough food calories per day that is needed.  Any conversation about "sustainable agriculture" has to begin by determining the best average diet for a given locale.  My general guidance for what kinds of foods to eat comes from the work of Dr. Weston Price.  From this general guidance, considering my locale and food preferences, I have selected "milk, eggs and meat" as the foundation of my diet ... veggies and grain products are a nice add on, but not essential.

So with that out of the way, the next question is "how to produce milk, eggs and meat organically and sustainably?"  And my answer comes from people like Permaculture leader Mark Shepard.  I am currently implementing a program similar to his.  One of Mark's key principles that he teaches is "Don't kill what wants to grow and don't try to grow what doesn't want to grow."  The way I apply that in my situation - for example with my dairy goats - is to feed my goats whatever is growing in my woodland - I have lots of elm, hackberry, poison ivy, etc. plus lots of stuff I can't even identify.  And I don't really care what it's called as long as my goats like it and eat it.  Also, I do not care what's going on in the soil beneath.  Obviously some good things are happening there because plant life is flourishing like crazy in my woodland and it's only getting better with the periodic disturbance / rest / poop & pee injection provided by my system which is simulating the role of predators in Nature.  Soon I will add multi-species (chickens and hogs probably) and things will get even better.

So I can simply "push high level buttons" on "Nature's Control Panel" and by doing so manage Nature sustainably for my benefit and for the benefit of all other species residing in my woodland as well.

I think this will probably blow your mind, but in time, I hope you'll get it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 15, 2016, 04:39:09 AM
What's that got to do with whether deserts can "green naturally"?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 04:40:41 AM
Quote
"No one ever fertilized an old growth forest.".
Humans, not so much. Millions of animals, from tiny worms to mice and birds to skunks and deer do. Did you know dust storms from Africa fertilise the Amazon?
heh

Yes, he does.

What he doesn't know is what "fertilize" means.  I keep asking him, but he won't say.
"Fertilize" (plants) means "feed" or "make food available" to plants.  Patricia Richardson talks about doing this the organic way in this Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKqHNzWxek  She says that humans have a C/N ratio of about 30:1, nematodes are about 15:1 and bacteria are only 5:1 ... so she says that having lots of bacteria in your soil is how you get lots of nitrogen in your soil.  BUT ... the nitrogen in soil bacteris is not AVAILABLE to plants.  So God created a neat little creature called a protozoan which runs around all day eating bacteria and ...

... pooping out the perfect form of nitrogen for plants.

I'm sure a similar conversation could be had for potassium and phosphorus and all the trace minerals needed for plants.
And what is that "form of nitrogen", Dave?




Don't know.  Don't care.  I'm a holistic manager, remember?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 15, 2016, 05:10:05 AM
So I can simply "push high level buttons" on "Nature's Control Panel" and by doing so manage Nature sustainably for my benefit and for the benefit of all other species residing in my woodland as well.
So you say.
So you hope.
So you even wishfully think.

But you haven't done that.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 15, 2016, 05:11:29 AM
No, I get what you are saying, Dave, and I don't have any problem with it. Sure, as an individual the methods you are applying are probably good enough to feed yourself. However, I don't think we are on the same page here. Unless you think society is going to revert to an agrarian society your ideas about sustainable agriculture are too simplistic to feed the entire planet.

I'm not talking about home gardening but talking about feeding the entire planet and getting away from the chemicals by using, as you say nature as the guide. But in order to do that it will require the help of biologists who study what they term the "soil food web". You don't care about the soil food web because it isn't necessary to know much about it for your system. To feed the entire world will require such knowledge which is far beyond the average person.

Anyway, my whole point in discussing sustainable agriculture is to highlight the necessity of science, which you seem to have some disdain for science. I don't get that. You use science yourself to some degree, you benefit from it, but when that same science doesn't support your religious beliefs you turn against it. Shame on you.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 15, 2016, 05:18:42 AM
Quote
"No one ever fertilized an old growth forest.".
Humans, not so much. Millions of animals, from tiny worms to mice and birds to skunks and deer do. Did you know dust storms from Africa fertilise the Amazon?
heh

Yes, he does.

What he doesn't know is what "fertilize" means.  I keep asking him, but he won't say.
"Fertilize" (plants) means "feed" or "make food available" to plants.  Patricia Richardson talks about doing this the organic way in this Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKqHNzWxek  She says that humans have a C/N ratio of about 30:1, nematodes are about 15:1 and bacteria are only 5:1 ... so she says that having lots of bacteria in your soil is how you get lots of nitrogen in your soil.  BUT ... the nitrogen in soil bacteris is not AVAILABLE to plants.  So God created a neat little creature called a protozoan which runs around all day eating bacteria and ...

... pooping out the perfect form of nitrogen for plants.

I'm sure a similar conversation could be had for potassium and phosphorus and all the trace minerals needed for plants.
And what is that "form of nitrogen", Dave?




Don't know.  Don't care.  I'm a holistic manager, remember?
No, you are an ignorant blowhard.  You were the one talking about the "perfect form of nitrogen" and how it was pooped out of protozoa, and apparently not from bacteria.  But you can't even say what it is. 

So you have no way of knowing whether Patricia Richardson has a case or not.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 15, 2016, 05:19:40 AM
Is it shortage of protozoans in the desert that mean they can't green naturally?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 15, 2016, 05:28:22 AM
Don't know.  Don't care.  I'm a holistic manager, remember?
Apparently to dave, being holistic means never having to know what you're talking about.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 15, 2016, 05:47:48 AM
Apparently.

But that doesn't stop him bullshitting about "forms of nitrogen" and "protozoans" and "C/N ratios".
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 15, 2016, 05:49:20 AM
Don't know.  Don't care.  I'm a holistic manager, remember?
Apparently to dave, being holistic means never having to know what you're talking about.
Ah, but he's pressing high level buttons, remember?

And yet is so afraid of parasites that he keeps his goats in a cage.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 15, 2016, 05:54:57 AM
As for nature: last night a two year old child was snatched and eaten by an alligator at Disney World. Nature is not entirely benign.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 15, 2016, 05:59:31 AM
As for nature: last night a two year old child was snatched and eaten by an alligator at Disney World. Nature is not entirely benign.
That's all our fault.  Every living thing was vegetarian and BFFs before...
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: thatsneakyguy on June 15, 2016, 06:05:30 AM
No, I get what you are saying, Dave, and I don't have any problem with it. Sure, as an individual the methods you are applying are probably good enough to feed yourself. However, I don't think we are on the same page here. Unless you think society is going to revert to an agrarian society your ideas about sustainable agriculture are too simplistic to feed the entire planet.

I'm not talking about home gardening but talking about feeding the entire planet and getting away from the chemicals by using, as you say nature as the guide. But in order to do that it will require the help of biologists who study what they term the "soil food web". You don't care about the soil food web because it isn't necessary to know much about it for your system. To feed the entire world will require such knowledge which is far beyond the average person.

Anyway, my whole point in discussing sustainable agriculture is to highlight the necessity of science, which you seem to have some disdain for science. I don't get that. You use science yourself to some degree, you benefit from it, but when that same science doesn't support your religious beliefs you turn against it. Shame on you.

The reason you don't get it RexT, is because you have become biased against Dave through your years of discourse with him.  You have spent too much time arguing with Dave and now you are biased.  It's not because you are voicing legitimate objections.  Your disagreements are evidence that you are not thinking rationally, and the simplest explanation of this is that you have a severe case of DaveMustBeWrongismtm.  Those are the only known reasons people disagree with Dave. 
Also this somehow makes you a member of the Darwin Club or something like that.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 15, 2016, 06:17:25 AM
Quite apart from the other bullshit, Dave's proposed diet (meat, milk, eggs, with veggies as an inessential option) is neither Weston Price (the "primitive races" he studied mostly didn't eat anything like that diet) nor Weston A Price Foundation (which advocates plenty of veggies), and I know of no research that demonstrates that a diet in which the bulk of your calories are from saturated fats is anything but harmful.

That might be incorrect - but the onus is on the person promoting such a bizarre diet to demonstrate it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 06:44:23 AM
There are two great examples  that come to mind of scientists ignoring/forgetting huge amounts of important data...

1) Prisca Sapientia
2) Weston Price

(Now  I've really lost Rex lol)

Probably not, I don't think you ever had him.

As to your two examples, not so sure the first totally applies but it is an example of the ignorance of peoples in the distant past who allowed themselves to be conned by myths and legends. .
The second is definitely a case of someone ignoring huge amounts of important data. What didn't support his views he ignored and he was too focused on his views to look for contrary data.

Sort of like you, Bluffy.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 15, 2016, 06:45:27 AM
Quite apart from the other bullshit, Dave's proposed diet (meat, milk, eggs, with veggies as an inessential option) is neither Weston Price (the "primitive races" he studied mostly didn't eat anything like that diet) nor Weston A Price Foundation (which advocates plenty of veggies), and I know of no research that demonstrates that a diet in which the bulk of your calories are from saturated fats is anything but harmful.

That might be incorrect - but the onus is on the person promoting such a bizarre diet to demonstrate it.

Quote
Inuit actually consume more carbohydrates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrates) than most nutritionists have assumed.[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Hui1985-14) Because Inuit frequently eat their meat raw and fresh, or freshly frozen, they can obtain more carbohydrates from their meat, as dietary glycogen, than Westerners can.[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Hui1985-14)[15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Rabinowitch-1936-15) The Inuit practice of preserving a whole seal or bird carcass under an intact whole skin with a thick layer of blubber also permits some proteins to ferment, or hydrolyze (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrolysis), into carbohydrates.[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Hui1985-14) Furthermore, the blubber, organs, muscle and skin of the marine mammals (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_mammal) that Inuit eat have significant glycogen stores, which assist those animals when oxygen is depleted on prolonged dives.[16] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Pfeiffer1997-16)[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Lockyer1991-17)[18] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-HochachkaStorey1975-18) For instance, when blubber is analyzed by direct carbohydrate measurements, it has been shown to contain as much as 8--30% carbohydrates.[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Lockyer1991-17) While postmortem glycogen levels are often depleted through the onset of rigor mortis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigor_mortis), marine mammals have a much delayed onset of rigor mortis, even in warm conditions, presumably due to the high content of oxymyoglobin in the muscle that may permit aerobic metabolism to continue slowly for some time after the death of the animal.[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Lockyer1991-17)[19] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-LawrieLedward2014-19) Additionally, in cold conditions, glycogen's depletion is halted at -18 °C (-0.4 °F) and lower temperatures in comminuted (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comminution) meat.[20] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-BechtelAUTHOR2012-20)[21] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-21)
Traditional Inuit diets derive approximately 50% of their calories (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie) from fat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat), 30-35% from protein (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein) and 15-20% of their calories (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie) from carbohydrates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrate), largely in the form of glycogen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycogen) from the raw meat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raw_meat) they consumed.[22] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-KroghKrogh-22)[23] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Ho1972-23) This high fat content provides valuable energy and prevents protein poisoning (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit_starvation), which historically was sometimes a problem in late winter when game animals grew lean through winter starvation. It has been suggested that because the fats of the Inuit's wild-caught game are largely monounsaturated (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monounsaturated_fat) and rich in omega-3 fatty acids (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega-3_fatty_acid), the diet does not pose the same health risks as a typical Western high-fat diet.[24] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-paradox-24) However, actual evidence has shown that Inuit have a similar prevalence of coronary artery disease (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronary_artery_disease) as non-Inuit populations and they have excessive mortality due to cerebrovascular strokes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroke), with twice the risk to that of the North American population.[25] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-FodorHelis2014-25)[26] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Slate082014-26) Indeed, the cardiovascular risk of this diet is so severe that the addition of a more standard American diet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_pattern_diet) has reduced the incidence of mortality in Inuit population.[27] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-27) Furthermore, fish oil supplement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_oil) studies have failed to support claims of preventing heart attacks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myocardial_infarction) or strokes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroke).[28] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-NYT-20150917-cz-28)[29] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-NYT-20150330-29)[30] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-JAMA-201403-30)
Vitamins (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin) and minerals which are typically derived from plant sources are nonetheless present in most Inuit diets. Vitamins A (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_A) and D (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_D) are present in the oils and livers of cold-water fishes and mammals. Vitamin C (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_C) is obtained through sources such as caribou liver, kelp (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelp), whale skin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muktuk), and seal brain; because these foods are typically eaten raw or frozen, the vitamin C they contain, which would be destroyed by cooking, is instead preserved.[ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-31)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#Nutrition

The Inuit are the only indigenous people I can think of whose traditional diet approaches Dave's fat intake, and even though they have several physiological adaptations that help, and they eat their meat raw, and much of their meat/fat is from sea mammals which themselves have physiological peculiarities, they still have high rates of cardiovascular disease which is reduced when they include Western foods in their diet.


I don't see Dave eating raw seal much, nor does he have the enlarged liver, extra urea elimination, or habit of keeping his edible animals whole and frozen.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 06:55:12 AM

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
Sure, because it's vastly more complex. But otherwise the same principles of science apply.
"Vastly" ...  Yeah... Like a gazillion times more complex.

In other words, life scientists don't have a fucking clue how life works (relatively speaking) Which is why they are fucking it up on such a grand scale.
Okay, fine. So we learn by our mistakes and eventually we make some progress. That's how science works. But modern medicine and the things known about say genetics is big progress. You must agree. So what is your point?
I agree that HEROIC medicine is great.  But we wouldn't need heroic medicine nearly as often if we would back up and get humble and realize that  mother nature is a hell of a lot smarter than we gave her credit for.
Still no specifics.
There's a reason for that.

You're not fooling anyone.
Except - possibly - yourself. But I doubt even that.
Still not talking about the subject of this thread. As usual, Bluffy got overwhelmed and found a little crevice he could slither down to avoid having to deal with the fact his basic premise, that deserts are currently growing is utter nonsense as is documented in the google list I posted with dozens of hits indicating the world's deserts are, in fact, shrinking and/or becoming more green.

Typical Bluffy. Typical Bluffoonery.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 06:57:16 AM
For example, farmers like me in the restoration agriculture movement can produce food while enhancing ecosystems rather than destroying them.  And we can do it with no inputs like grain  which are produced by  destructive agriculture.  And without meds like wormers  and antibiotics and vaccinations which are also destructive.

You're not a farmer, Bluffy. That's just another of your delusions. You haven't raised anything yet, just bought stuff and are now maintaining that stuff. Which is surprisingly good for you, the fellow who couldn't figure out his rabbits were both males.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 06:58:10 AM
For example, farmers like me in the restoration agriculture movement...
Yippee! Dave has bought two goats!

:slowclap:

Hey, don't forget the rabbits and chickens. He does have those, right?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 07:01:24 AM

LIFE science is different.

 And there is an extremely important reason WHY it's different.
Sure, because it's vastly more complex. But otherwise the same principles of science apply.
"Vastly" ...  Yeah... Like a gazillion times more complex.

In other words, life scientists don't have a fucking clue how life works (relatively speaking) Which is why they are fucking it up on such a grand scale.
Okay, fine. So we learn by our mistakes and eventually we make some progress. That's how science works. But modern medicine and the things known about say genetics is big progress. You must agree. So what is your point?
I agree that HEROIC medicine is great.  But we wouldn't need heroic medicine nearly as often if we would back up and get humble and realize that  mother nature is a hell of a lot smarter than we gave her credit for.

She is also good at killing people.
We are not anything special in the grand scheme of things.

Oh yes we are.  And thankfully a few rare souls working in the life sciences - guys like Michael Denton - recognize that we are.

Yay! We're into the Bluffy Bluff and Bluster phase. The Blather was getting boring.

How long will it be before Bluffy Badgers?

Oh, RexT, that's another interesting bit of data about Bluffy, he's Badgering. Has someone imported that into here from the old TR? It was simply fabulous. The perfect metaphor for how Bluffy works.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 07:04:25 AM
No, I get what you are saying, Dave, and I don't have any problem with it. Sure, as an individual the methods you are applying are probably good enough to feed yourself. However, I don't think we are on the same page here. Unless you think society is going to revert to an agrarian society your ideas about sustainable agriculture are too simplistic to feed the entire planet.

I'm not talking about home gardening but talking about feeding the entire planet and getting away from the chemicals by using, as you say nature as the guide. But in order to do that it will require the help of biologists who study what they term the "soil food web". You don't care about the soil food web because it isn't necessary to know much about it for your system. To feed the entire world will require such knowledge which is far beyond the average person.

Anyway, my whole point in discussing sustainable agriculture is to highlight the necessity of science, which you seem to have some disdain for science. I don't get that. You use science yourself to some degree, you benefit from it, but when that same science doesn't support your religious beliefs you turn against it. Shame on you.
Science is great in fields other than the life sciences.  Science has produced wonderful tools like the Internet and my iPhone. And science is great when it leads to advances in heroic medicine.  But science has been a colossal failure when it comes to "feeding the world" and I believe it will continue to be a failure if we follow guidance such as yours.  Industrial agriculture is literally killing our topsoil and making our bodies unhealthy.    I now have a pretty good understanding of the systems required to change all that (i'm about halfway there in doing it for myself) and my goal for the rest of my life is to  blaze a trail for those who want to get off this "sinking Titanic."  Not everyone will do so of course and there will always be the parasites in society who don't want to spend the two hours of labor per day to produce their own food and instead want to be fed with a silver spoon.  I will always be shining a spotlight on people like that and exposing them for the parasites that they truly are.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 07:07:09 AM
The question of "how much credit do I give nature" is where being a creationist leaves the competition (non-creationists) in the dust.  Most life scientists are not giving Mother Nature anywhere near enough credit  because they think life came about from a dumb, blind process which -  at the bottom of it - is why they insult her with things like DDT and antibiotics and vaccinations.

Actually, RexT, Bluffy is more of an animist than the usual creationist. His adoration of his imaginary Mother Nature is a Mortal Sin according to his sworn religion. His favored god doesn't condone female competition and I'm pretty sure doesn't like being referred to as a Mother, naturally or otherwise. 
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 15, 2016, 07:09:13 AM
Quote
"No one ever fertilized an old growth forest.".
Humans, not so much. Millions of animals, from tiny worms to mice and birds to skunks and deer do. Did you know dust storms from Africa fertilise the Amazon?
heh

Yes, he does.

What he doesn't know is what "fertilize" means.  I keep asking him, but he won't say.
"Fertilize" (plants) means "feed" or "make food available" to plants.  Patricia Richardson talks about doing this the organic way in this Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKqHNzWxek  She says that humans have a C/N ratio of about 30:1, nematodes are about 15:1 and bacteria are only 5:1 ... so she says that having lots of bacteria in your soil is how you get lots of nitrogen in your soil.  BUT ... the nitrogen in soil bacteris is not AVAILABLE to plants.  So God created a neat little creature called a protozoan which runs around all day eating bacteria and ...

... pooping out the perfect form of nitrogen for plants.

I'm sure a similar conversation could be had for potassium and phosphorus and all the trace minerals needed for plants.
You might want to look up nitrogen fixing fungi symbiotic something or other.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 07:09:29 AM
We do not need things like DDT or round up or antibiotics or vaccinations in our world.  What we need is to live in accordance with nature's principles.  And I don't say that while
armchair quarterbacking in plush, air-conditioned luxury.  I say it from the sweaty trenches of reality.  I'm eating my own cooking.

Based upon the rest of your accomplishments, that must be akin to hell. I mean, a serious accomplishment, in that you can get it down at all. Or perhaps keep it down.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 15, 2016, 07:10:14 AM

The reason you don't get it RexT, is because you have become biased against Dave through your years of discourse with him.  You have spent too much time arguing with Dave and now you are biased.  It's not because you are voicing legitimate objections.  Your disagreements are evidence that you are not thinking rationally, and the simplest explanation of this is that you have a severe case of DaveMustBeWrongismtm.  Those are the only known reasons people disagree with Dave. 
Also this somehow makes you a member of the Darwin Club or something like that.
Thanks for a good morning belly laugh. Made my day.

Darwin Club, yes I am!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 07:14:53 AM
Quite apart from the other bullshit, Dave's proposed diet (meat, milk, eggs, with veggies as an inessential option) is neither Weston Price (the "primitive races" he studied mostly didn't eat anything like that diet) nor Weston A Price Foundation (which advocates plenty of veggies), and I know of no research that demonstrates that a diet in which the bulk of your calories are from saturated fats is anything but harmful.

That might be incorrect - but the onus is on the person promoting such a bizarre diet to demonstrate it.

Quote
Inuit actually consume more carbohydrates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrates) than most nutritionists have assumed.[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Hui1985-14) Because Inuit frequently eat their meat raw and fresh, or freshly frozen, they can obtain more carbohydrates from their meat, as dietary glycogen, than Westerners can.[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Hui1985-14)[15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Rabinowitch-1936-15) The Inuit practice of preserving a whole seal or bird carcass under an intact whole skin with a thick layer of blubber also permits some proteins to ferment, or hydrolyze (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrolysis), into carbohydrates.[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Hui1985-14) Furthermore, the blubber, organs, muscle and skin of the marine mammals (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_mammal) that Inuit eat have significant glycogen stores, which assist those animals when oxygen is depleted on prolonged dives.[16] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Pfeiffer1997-16)[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Lockyer1991-17)[18] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-HochachkaStorey1975-18) For instance, when blubber is analyzed by direct carbohydrate measurements, it has been shown to contain as much as 8--30% carbohydrates.[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Lockyer1991-17) While postmortem glycogen levels are often depleted through the onset of rigor mortis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigor_mortis), marine mammals have a much delayed onset of rigor mortis, even in warm conditions, presumably due to the high content of oxymyoglobin in the muscle that may permit aerobic metabolism to continue slowly for some time after the death of the animal.[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Lockyer1991-17)[19] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-LawrieLedward2014-19) Additionally, in cold conditions, glycogen's depletion is halted at -18 °C (-0.4 °F) and lower temperatures in comminuted (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comminution) meat.[20] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-BechtelAUTHOR2012-20)[21] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-21)
Traditional Inuit diets derive approximately 50% of their calories (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie) from fat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat), 30-35% from protein (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein) and 15-20% of their calories (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie) from carbohydrates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrate), largely in the form of glycogen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycogen) from the raw meat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raw_meat) they consumed.[22] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-KroghKrogh-22)[23] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Ho1972-23) This high fat content provides valuable energy and prevents protein poisoning (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit_starvation), which historically was sometimes a problem in late winter when game animals grew lean through winter starvation. It has been suggested that because the fats of the Inuit's wild-caught game are largely monounsaturated (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monounsaturated_fat) and rich in omega-3 fatty acids (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega-3_fatty_acid), the diet does not pose the same health risks as a typical Western high-fat diet.[24] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-paradox-24) However, actual evidence has shown that Inuit have a similar prevalence of coronary artery disease (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronary_artery_disease) as non-Inuit populations and they have excessive mortality due to cerebrovascular strokes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroke), with twice the risk to that of the North American population.[25] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-FodorHelis2014-25)[26] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Slate082014-26) Indeed, the cardiovascular risk of this diet is so severe that the addition of a more standard American diet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_pattern_diet) has reduced the incidence of mortality in Inuit population.[27] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-27) Furthermore, fish oil supplement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_oil) studies have failed to support claims of preventing heart attacks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myocardial_infarction) or strokes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroke).[28] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-NYT-20150917-cz-28)[29] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-NYT-20150330-29)[30] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-JAMA-201403-30)
Vitamins (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin) and minerals which are typically derived from plant sources are nonetheless present in most Inuit diets. Vitamins A (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_A) and D (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_D) are present in the oils and livers of cold-water fishes and mammals. Vitamin C (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_C) is obtained through sources such as caribou liver, kelp (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelp), whale skin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muktuk), and seal brain; because these foods are typically eaten raw or frozen, the vitamin C they contain, which would be destroyed by cooking, is instead preserved.[ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-31)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#Nutrition

The Inuit are the only indigenous people I can think of whose traditional diet approaches Dave's fat intake, and even though they have several physiological adaptations that help, and they eat their meat raw, and much of their meat/fat is from sea mammals which themselves have physiological peculiarities, they still have high rates of cardiovascular disease which is reduced when they include Western foods in their diet.


I don't see Dave eating raw seal much, nor does he have the enlarged liver, extra urea elimination, or habit of keeping his edible animals whole and frozen.
Both of you ladies are completely clueless when it comes to Price... I can only assume that this is because you have not read his book.

What about the Masai with their diet of milk and blood?  What about the Arabs with their heavy dependence on camels milk?  What about the Swiss and Price's long discussion about their milk and cheese and the importance of the type of grass that the cows are eating?

You gals are so clueless that it almost hurts to watch.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 15, 2016, 07:15:06 AM
No, I get what you are saying, Dave, and I don't have any problem with it. Sure, as an individual the methods you are applying are probably good enough to feed yourself. However, I don't think we are on the same page here. Unless you think society is going to revert to an agrarian society your ideas about sustainable agriculture are too simplistic to feed the entire planet.

I'm not talking about home gardening but talking about feeding the entire planet and getting away from the chemicals by using, as you say nature as the guide. But in order to do that it will require the help of biologists who study what they term the "soil food web". You don't care about the soil food web because it isn't necessary to know much about it for your system. To feed the entire world will require such knowledge which is far beyond the average person.

Anyway, my whole point in discussing sustainable agriculture is to highlight the necessity of science, which you seem to have some disdain for science. I don't get that. You use science yourself to some degree, you benefit from it, but when that same science doesn't support your religious beliefs you turn against it. Shame on you.
he wants to go back to about 1850 but without any cities. Basically he wants the world to bend to his will and believes they want to because of his superior form of stupidity.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 07:15:58 AM
Quote
"No one ever fertilized an old growth forest.".
Humans, not so much. Millions of animals, from tiny worms to mice and birds to skunks and deer do. Did you know dust storms from Africa fertilise the Amazon?
One reason Hawaii is so verdant is dust from the Gobi. This is also true of much of the Pacific Northwest Coast.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 15, 2016, 07:17:17 AM
No, I get what you are saying, Dave, and I don't have any problem with it. Sure, as an individual the methods you are applying are probably good enough to feed yourself. However, I don't think we are on the same page here. Unless you think society is going to revert to an agrarian society your ideas about sustainable agriculture are too simplistic to feed the entire planet.

I'm not talking about home gardening but talking about feeding the entire planet and getting away from the chemicals by using, as you say nature as the guide. But in order to do that it will require the help of biologists who study what they term the "soil food web". You don't care about the soil food web because it isn't necessary to know much about it for your system. To feed the entire world will require such knowledge which is far beyond the average person.

Anyway, my whole point in discussing sustainable agriculture is to highlight the necessity of science, which you seem to have some disdain for science. I don't get that. You use science yourself to some degree, you benefit from it, but when that same science doesn't support your religious beliefs you turn against it. Shame on you.
Science is great in fields other than the life sciences.  Science has produced wonderful tools like the Internet and my iPhone. And science is great when it leads to advances in heroic medicine.  But science has been a colossal failure when it comes to "feeding the world" and I believe it will continue to be a failure if we follow guidance such as yours.  Industrial agriculture is literally killing our topsoil and making our bodies unhealthy.    I now have a pretty good understanding of the systems required to change all that (i'm about halfway there in doing it for myself) and my goal for the rest of my life is to  blaze a trail for those who want to get off this "sinking Titanic."  Not everyone will do so of course and there will always be the parasites in society who don't want to spend the two hours of labor per day to produce their own food and instead want to be fed with a silver spoon.  I will always be shining a spotlight on people like that and exposing them for the parasites that they truly are.


2 hrs. Heh.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 07:18:03 AM
The problem is that most scientists are unaware of the data that actually matters so they spend their lives slicing and dicing and analyzing data that doesn't matter.  And they never question the assumptions which give rise to the decline of Leopold's "two organisms" because they are unaware of these assumptions.
dear god could you be any stupider?
Afdave's Seventh Law: No matter how transparently pathetic or retarded any of Dave's claims may be they can always be followed by something even more pathetic and retarded.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 07:18:41 AM
 Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 15, 2016, 07:20:31 AM
The question of "how much credit do I give nature" is where being a creationist leaves the competition (non-creationists) in the dust.  Most life scientists are not giving Mother Nature anywhere near enough credit  because they think life came about from a dumb, blind process which -  at the bottom of it - is why they insult her with things like DDT and antibiotics and vaccinations.

Actually, RexT, Bluffy is more of an animist than the usual creationist. His adoration of his imaginary Mother Nature is a Mortal Sin according to his sworn religion. His favored god doesn't condone female competition and I'm pretty sure doesn't like being referred to as a Mother, naturally or otherwise. 
I dunno. Yahweh's on record describing (him)self as a mother hen. If Dave's a Trinitarian, which I assume he is, then he should be aware that there is near consensus among mainstream Protestants on the idea of the Holy Spirit being the feminine aspect of God (there are hymns in the newer hymnals that reflect this).

Of course there was that possible nasty divorce from Asherah (closest thing to a Nature goddess in that part of the world back in the day), cutting down her groves and refusing to allow the people to offer her honey cakes and booting her off the double throne Yahweh started out on, but hey that's all water under the bridge. Dave's probably safe with a little Nature worship. What he needs to be careful with is offending Her through his abysmal ignorance of Her ways and his intentional perversions of Her established order.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 15, 2016, 07:21:26 AM

Actually, RexT, Bluffy is more of an animist than the usual creationist. His adoration of his imaginary Mother Nature is a Mortal Sin according to his sworn religion. His favored god doesn't condone female competition and I'm pretty sure doesn't like being referred to as a Mother, naturally or otherwise. 
Why does that not surprise me?

Maybe that explains his infatuation with old science and old views of the world.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 07:21:46 AM
The question of "how much credit do I give nature" is where being a creationist leaves the competition (non-creationists) in the dust.  Most life scientists are not giving Mother Nature anywhere near enough credit  because they think life came about from a dumb, blind process which -  at the bottom of it - is why they insult her with things like DDT and antibiotics and vaccinations.
Well holy shit fucking damn all mighty and bitch to the mother fucking bastard. Sorry, I just had to cuss for a second there. That's how I do it when I get left in the dust, you see.

I ain't buying what you're selling. I'm a bushiness man, Dave. You can keep your snake oil for yourself. If we are done with your fairy tale dustings, can we get back to reality Mr Dave. After all I'm trying to get this show off the ground and I can't do that with the Real Dave Hawkins Make-believe Show. It's a reality show or the deal is off.

Anyway, you got the wrong guys.

RexT, as previously noted, all of this bluster and bravado is just an example of Bluffy's (AFDave's) Eighth Law: Any thread where I'm getting my ass handed to me on the original topic can be prolonged indefinitely by the introduction of tangential diversions or an abnormal focus on meaningless minutiae. As noted, Bluffy had gotten his ass handed to him with the posting of the number of hits in a google list indicating deserts are greening and shrinking, totally refuting the stated basis of this thread.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 15, 2016, 07:23:39 AM
For example, farmers like me in the restoration agriculture movement...
Yippee! Dave has bought two goats!

:slowclap:

Hey, don't forget the rabbits and chickens. He does have those, right?
ahh. Rabbits. Chickens are still to come I think. Although this is the time of year to be getting pullets. He'll have to wait a year
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 07:24:30 AM
Quote
Organic gardening is a nice (small) part of sustainable agriculture but the real heavy duty sustainable agriculture - the part that is really going to produce the majority of the food calories - is managing "flerds" in restored savannas (Mark Shepard).  I'm talking about "flerds" consisting of cattle, sheep, goats, chickens, turkeys, ducks, hogs and even elephants and giraffes all in a single group, bunched and constantly on the move to simulate what predators do in Nature.
You should know by now that is NOT how predator-prey relationships work, it is NOT how animals graze, and some of those animals are NOT compatible in mixed company.

Do these grazing caribou look bunched and constantly moving to you?

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/09/23/business/caribou/caribou-blogSpan.jpg)

You know virtually nothing of animal behaviour, as is evident from your current practice of keeping your goats in a tiny cage. You certainly know nothing about predator behaviours, and nothing about the real methods prey animals use to defend against predators.

Mark Shepard is not a magic word.



Wut are you saying? Of course it is. Uttering Saint Shepard's name and smearing oneself with chicken shit will ward off all sorts of things.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 15, 2016, 07:24:50 AM
Don't know.  Don't care.  I'm a holistic manager, remember?
Apparently to dave, being holistic means never having to know what you're talking about.
lol
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 15, 2016, 07:26:21 AM
You gals are so clueless that it almost hurts to watch.
Yeah, it really bites some men when the women folk are smarter than they are.

You women should have never been let out of your cages!

Round em back up Dave.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 07:29:45 AM
Don't know.  Don't care.  I'm a holistic manager, remember?
Apparently to dave, being holistic means never having to know what you're talking about.

Well then, he's got that wrong. That definition belongs to "fullistic".
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 07:31:10 AM
Don't know.  Don't care.  I'm a holistic manager, remember?
Apparently to dave, being holistic means never having to know what you're talking about.
Ah, but he's pressing high level buttons, remember?

And yet is so afraid of parasites that he keeps his goats in a cage.

I wonder if "high level" doesn't mean something he's not tall enough to actually see.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 15, 2016, 07:31:39 AM
RexT, as previously noted, all of this bluster and bravado is just an example of Bluffy's (AFDave's) Eighth Law: Any thread where I'm getting my ass handed to me on the original topic can be prolonged indefinitely by the introduction of tangential diversions or an abnormal focus on meaningless minutiae. As noted, Bluffy had gotten his ass handed to him with the posting of the number of hits in a google list indicating deserts are greening and shrinking, totally refuting the stated basis of this thread.
Ah, I see you have simplified the whole process by teasing out the governing laws of AFDave Discussions. Very clever you scientists are. Very clever indeed. :)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 15, 2016, 07:32:40 AM
Quite apart from the other bullshit, Dave's proposed diet (meat, milk, eggs, with veggies as an inessential option) is neither Weston Price (the "primitive races" he studied mostly didn't eat anything like that diet) nor Weston A Price Foundation (which advocates plenty of veggies), and I know of no research that demonstrates that a diet in which the bulk of your calories are from saturated fats is anything but harmful.

That might be incorrect - but the onus is on the person promoting such a bizarre diet to demonstrate it.

Quote
Inuit actually consume more carbohydrates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrates) than most nutritionists have assumed.[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Hui1985-14) Because Inuit frequently eat their meat raw and fresh, or freshly frozen, they can obtain more carbohydrates from their meat, as dietary glycogen, than Westerners can.[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Hui1985-14)[15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Rabinowitch-1936-15) The Inuit practice of preserving a whole seal or bird carcass under an intact whole skin with a thick layer of blubber also permits some proteins to ferment, or hydrolyze (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrolysis), into carbohydrates.[14] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Hui1985-14) Furthermore, the blubber, organs, muscle and skin of the marine mammals (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_mammal) that Inuit eat have significant glycogen stores, which assist those animals when oxygen is depleted on prolonged dives.[16] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Pfeiffer1997-16)[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Lockyer1991-17)[18] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-HochachkaStorey1975-18) For instance, when blubber is analyzed by direct carbohydrate measurements, it has been shown to contain as much as 8--30% carbohydrates.[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Lockyer1991-17) While postmortem glycogen levels are often depleted through the onset of rigor mortis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigor_mortis), marine mammals have a much delayed onset of rigor mortis, even in warm conditions, presumably due to the high content of oxymyoglobin in the muscle that may permit aerobic metabolism to continue slowly for some time after the death of the animal.[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Lockyer1991-17)[19] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-LawrieLedward2014-19) Additionally, in cold conditions, glycogen's depletion is halted at -18 °C (-0.4 °F) and lower temperatures in comminuted (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comminution) meat.[20] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-BechtelAUTHOR2012-20)[21] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-21)
Traditional Inuit diets derive approximately 50% of their calories (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie) from fat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat), 30-35% from protein (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein) and 15-20% of their calories (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie) from carbohydrates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrate), largely in the form of glycogen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycogen) from the raw meat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raw_meat) they consumed.[22] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-KroghKrogh-22)[23] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Ho1972-23) This high fat content provides valuable energy and prevents protein poisoning (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit_starvation), which historically was sometimes a problem in late winter when game animals grew lean through winter starvation. It has been suggested that because the fats of the Inuit's wild-caught game are largely monounsaturated (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monounsaturated_fat) and rich in omega-3 fatty acids (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega-3_fatty_acid), the diet does not pose the same health risks as a typical Western high-fat diet.[24] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-paradox-24) However, actual evidence has shown that Inuit have a similar prevalence of coronary artery disease (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronary_artery_disease) as non-Inuit populations and they have excessive mortality due to cerebrovascular strokes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroke), with twice the risk to that of the North American population.[25] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-FodorHelis2014-25)[26] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-Slate082014-26) Indeed, the cardiovascular risk of this diet is so severe that the addition of a more standard American diet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_pattern_diet) has reduced the incidence of mortality in Inuit population.[27] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-27) Furthermore, fish oil supplement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_oil) studies have failed to support claims of preventing heart attacks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myocardial_infarction) or strokes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroke).[28] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-NYT-20150917-cz-28)[29] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-NYT-20150330-29)[30] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-JAMA-201403-30)
Vitamins (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin) and minerals which are typically derived from plant sources are nonetheless present in most Inuit diets. Vitamins A (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_A) and D (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_D) are present in the oils and livers of cold-water fishes and mammals. Vitamin C (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_C) is obtained through sources such as caribou liver, kelp (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelp), whale skin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muktuk), and seal brain; because these foods are typically eaten raw or frozen, the vitamin C they contain, which would be destroyed by cooking, is instead preserved.[ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#cite_note-31)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit_diet#Nutrition

The Inuit are the only indigenous people I can think of whose traditional diet approaches Dave's fat intake, and even though they have several physiological adaptations that help, and they eat their meat raw, and much of their meat/fat is from sea mammals which themselves have physiological peculiarities, they still have high rates of cardiovascular disease which is reduced when they include Western foods in their diet.


I don't see Dave eating raw seal much, nor does he have the enlarged liver, extra urea elimination, or habit of keeping his edible animals whole and frozen.
Both of you ladies are completely clueless when it comes to Price... I can only assume that this is because you have not read his book.

What about the Masai with their diet of milk and blood?  What about the Arabs with their heavy dependence on camels milk?  What about the Swiss and Price's long discussion about their milk and cheese and the importance of the type of grass that the cows are eating?

You gals are so clueless that it almost hurts to watch.
Price was convinced that the more the people he wrote about looked like Europeans, the 'healthier' they were. He couldn't distinguish one Black face from another. He ignored older tribe members with bad teeth entirely, only recording the dental health of young adults and children.

We've been through this before, Dave, showing you that the Masai, for example, also eat lots of plants. Just because Europeans fixate on one aspect of an indigenous group doesn't mean they know the whole story.

Quote
Yet another finding was the outcome of the fieldwork in Africa. Nadja Knoll´s study shows that the traditional story patterns about the Maasai diet are wrong. Travelers in Africa like Gustav Adolf Fischer (1848-1886) and the Englishman Joseph Thomson (1858-1895) spread the image of the blood thirsty Maasai. According to their reports the herdsmen consume mainly meat, milk and blood. A particularly high percentage of fermented milk -- a kind of yoghurt -- was also said to be part of their diet. Nadja Knoll´s findings paint a very different picture. The scientist of Jena University discovered that the Maasai have strongly sweetened milk tea for breakfast. Some Maasai eat a kind of "porridge" in the morning, a liquid mixture of cormeal, water, some milk and sugar.
For lunch there will be milk and "Ugali," a kind of polenta being made from cormeal and water. "Dinner is similar to lunch," says Knoll who points out that she did her field study at the end of the dry season. There may be slightly different results in the -- remarkably shorter -- rainy season, because then the Maasai livestock produces more milk. This milk will then ferment in calabashes. The outcome of the fermenting process will be a yoghurt-like drink that might have pro-biotic benefits.
It is clear though that meat features only rarely on the Maasai menu. The main part -- more than 50 percent -- consists of vegetarian food. The preferred meat is that of sheep and goats, whereas the meat of traditional Zebu cattle is only rarely eaten. "A cow will only be slaughtered for ritual festivities by the Maasai," says Knoll.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100517111910.htm
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 07:32:55 AM
Quote
"No one ever fertilized an old growth forest.".
Humans, not so much. Millions of animals, from tiny worms to mice and birds to skunks and deer do. Did you know dust storms from Africa fertilise the Amazon?
heh

Yes, he does.

What he doesn't know is what "fertilize" means.  I keep asking him, but he won't say.
"Fertilize" (plants) means "feed" or "make food available" to plants.  Patricia Richardson talks about doing this the organic way in this Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKqHNzWxek  She says that humans have a C/N ratio of about 30:1, nematodes are about 15:1 and bacteria are only 5:1 ... so she says that having lots of bacteria in your soil is how you get lots of nitrogen in your soil.  BUT ... the nitrogen in soil bacteris is not AVAILABLE to plants.  So God created a neat little creature called a protozoan which runs around all day eating bacteria and ...

... pooping out the perfect form of nitrogen for plants.

I'm sure a similar conversation could be had for potassium and phosphorus and all the trace minerals needed for plants.
And what is that "form of nitrogen", Dave?




Don't know.  Don't care.  I'm a holistic manager, remember?
No, you are an ignorant blowhard.  You were the one talking about the "perfect form of nitrogen" and how it was pooped out of protozoa, and apparently not from bacteria.  But you can't even say what it is.

So you have no way of knowing whether Patricia Richardson has a case or not.
No I actually AM a holistic farm manager because I am actually managing food producing animals holistically and actually feeding myself some of the most healthy food to be found anywhere on the planet by doing so. 

You on the other hand are not managing any animals holistically. Instead, you are sitting in your plush armchair  in your ivory tower at the University of Nottingham trying to armchair quarterback me  with no knowledge whatsoever of what you're talking about and pretending you know something about the science  that I am involved in. And with each post I see more and more evidence that you don't have a clue about the science  that I am deeply involved in,  and I wonder whether you know much about science in general.  Fancy degrees do not convince me that you are a good scientist. What comes out of your keyboard is what will convince me.

There is absolutely no need whatsoever for me to know the answer to the question that you posed.  Patricia Richardson gave us some interesting information, but I don't think you have a clue as to how that information should be used,  based on the question that you asked.  One great purpose of this information from Patricia Richardson is to increase our awe and respect of mother nature, and  hopefully inspire us to work WITH her more diligently instead of working against her.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 07:37:44 AM
 Borealis pontificating about the Masai. Setting Price straight.

:facepalm:
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 07:44:56 AM
You gals are so clueless that it almost hurts to watch.
Yeah, it really bites some men when the women folk are smarter than they are.

You women should have never been let out of your cages!

Round em back up Dave.
Barbara McClintock is an example of a woman who was far smarter than me.  I'm sure there are many other examples. Who did you have in mind?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 07:45:12 AM
RexT, as previously noted, all of this bluster and bravado is just an example of Bluffy's (AFDave's) Eighth Law: Any thread where I'm getting my ass handed to me on the original topic can be prolonged indefinitely by the introduction of tangential diversions or an abnormal focus on meaningless minutiae. As noted, Bluffy had gotten his ass handed to him with the posting of the number of hits in a google list indicating deserts are greening and shrinking, totally refuting the stated basis of this thread.
Ah, I see you have simplified the whole process by teasing out the governing laws of AFDave Discussions. Very clever you scientists are. Very clever indeed. :)

Not me. These were developed long ago by much smarter folks.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 15, 2016, 07:49:14 AM
Is it shortage of protozoans in the desert that mean they can't green naturally?
back a long enough way the desert was full of proto Zulus.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 07:50:11 AM
Quote
"No one ever fertilized an old growth forest.".
Humans, not so much. Millions of animals, from tiny worms to mice and birds to skunks and deer do. Did you know dust storms from Africa fertilise the Amazon?
heh

Yes, he does.

What he doesn't know is what "fertilize" means.  I keep asking him, but he won't say.
"Fertilize" (plants) means "feed" or "make food available" to plants.  Patricia Richardson talks about doing this the organic way in this Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKqHNzWxek  She says that humans have a C/N ratio of about 30:1, nematodes are about 15:1 and bacteria are only 5:1 ... so she says that having lots of bacteria in your soil is how you get lots of nitrogen in your soil.  BUT ... the nitrogen in soil bacteris is not AVAILABLE to plants.  So God created a neat little creature called a protozoan which runs around all day eating bacteria and ...

... pooping out the perfect form of nitrogen for plants.

I'm sure a similar conversation could be had for potassium and phosphorus and all the trace minerals needed for plants.
And what is that "form of nitrogen", Dave?




Don't know.  Don't care.  I'm a holistic manager, remember?
No, you are an ignorant blowhard.  You were the one talking about the "perfect form of nitrogen" and how it was pooped out of protozoa, and apparently not from bacteria.  But you can't even say what it is.

So you have no way of knowing whether Patricia Richardson has a case or not.
No I actually AM a holistic farm manager because I am actually managing food producing animals holistically and actually feeding myself some of the most healthy food to be found anywhere on the planet by doing so. 

You on the other hand are not managing any animals holistically. Instead, you are sitting in your plush armchair  in your ivory tower at the University of Nottingham trying to armchair quarterback me  with no knowledge whatsoever of what you're talking about and pretending you know something about the science  that I am involved in. And with each post I see more and more evidence that you don't have a clue about the science  that I am deeply involved in,  and I wonder whether you know much about science in general.  Fancy degrees do not convince me that you are a good scientist. What comes out of your keyboard is what will convince me.

There is absolutely no need whatsoever for me to know the answer to the question that you posed.  Patricia Richardson gave us some interesting information, but I don't think you have a clue as to how that information should be used,  based on the question that you asked.  One great purpose of this information from Patricia Richardson is to increase our awe and respect of mother nature, and  hopefully inspire us to work WITH her more diligently instead of working against her.

In other words, as you admitted, you don't have a clue.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 15, 2016, 07:51:45 AM
Quote
"No one ever fertilized an old growth forest.".
Humans, not so much. Millions of animals, from tiny worms to mice and birds to skunks and deer do. Did you know dust storms from Africa fertilise the Amazon?
heh

Yes, he does.

What he doesn't know is what "fertilize" means.  I keep asking him, but he won't say.
"Fertilize" (plants) means "feed" or "make food available" to plants.  Patricia Richardson talks about doing this the organic way in this Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKqHNzWxek  She says that humans have a C/N ratio of about 30:1, nematodes are about 15:1 and bacteria are only 5:1 ... so she says that having lots of bacteria in your soil is how you get lots of nitrogen in your soil.  BUT ... the nitrogen in soil bacteris is not AVAILABLE to plants.  So God created a neat little creature called a protozoan which runs around all day eating bacteria and ...

... pooping out the perfect form of nitrogen for plants.

I'm sure a similar conversation could be had for potassium and phosphorus and all the trace minerals needed for plants.
And what is that "form of nitrogen", Dave?




Don't know.  Don't care.  I'm a holistic manager, remember?
No, you are an ignorant blowhard.  You were the one talking about the "perfect form of nitrogen" and how it was pooped out of protozoa, and apparently not from bacteria.  But you can't even say what it is.

So you have no way of knowing whether Patricia Richardson has a case or not.
No I actually AM a holistic farm manager because I am actually managing food producing animals dear g and actually feeding myself some of the most healthy food to be found anywhere on the planet by doing so. 

You on the other hand are not managing any animals holistically. Instead, you are sitting in your plush armchair  in your ivory tower at the University of Nottingham trying to armchair quarterback me  with no knowledge whatsoever of what you're talking about and pretending you know something about the science  that I am involved in. And with each post I see more and more evidence that you don't have a clue about the science  that I am deeply involved in,  and I wonder whether you know much about science in general.  Fancy degrees do not convince me that you are a good scientist. What comes out of your keyboard is what will convince me.

There is absolutely no need whatsoever for me to know the answer to the question that you posed.  Patricia Richardson gave us some interesting information, but I don't think you have a clue as to how that information should be used,  based on the question that you asked.  One great purpose of this information from Patricia Richardson is to increase our awe and respect of mother nature, and  hopefully inspire us to work WITH her more diligently instead of working against her.
Dear god you hit bedrock and keep digging.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 07:52:57 AM
Borealis pontificating about the Masai. Setting Price straight.

:facepalm:

No, Bor was just quoting the research paper written by a scientist who actually studied the Maasai. It's not surprising this scientist's accounts of the Maasai diet is more correct that Price's being as she actually studied them using the scientific method.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 15, 2016, 07:53:34 AM
Borealis pontificating about the Masai. Setting Price straight.

:facepalm:
Not me, but modern scientists who study the same people Price, with his early 1900s white man attitudes and beliefs, briefly looked at in the 1930s.

It's you who insists on worshipping at the feet of a dentist who died in 1948, many of whose notions have been debunked thoroughly and were questioned even in his own era.

If you had the common sense your presumed god gave you, you'd stop being so arrogant and so fixated on your own prideful ignorance and actually try to learn something. Discernment is not one of your talents.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 07:54:07 AM
You gals are so clueless that it almost hurts to watch.
Yeah, it really bites some men when the women folk are smarter than they are.

You women should have never been let out of your cages!

Round em back up Dave.
Barbara McClintock is an example of a woman who was far smarter than me.  I'm sure there are many other examples. Who did you have in mind?

Minnie Mouse is far smarter than you, Bluffy. As nearly anyone.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 07:57:57 AM
Borealis pontificating about the Masai. Setting Price straight.

:facepalm:
Not me, but modern scientists who study the same people Price, with his early 1900s white man attitudes and beliefs, briefly looked at in the 1930s.

It's you who insists on worshipping at the feet of a dentist who died in 1948, many of whose notions have been debunked thoroughly and were questioned even in his own era.

If you had the common sense your presumed god gave you, you'd stop being so arrogant and so fixated on your own prideful ignorance and actually try to learn something. Discernment is not one of your talents.
"Debunked Price"

Lol

So was Hujoels wrong for citing Price in support of his points?  You know that 2009 paper in the Journal of Dentistry that I've linked to about 10 times?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 07:59:22 AM
 You people are supposed to have advanced science degrees (or at least have a clue about science) and you just constantly post bullshit. It's amazing!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 15, 2016, 08:03:00 AM
Science is great in fields other than the life sciences.  Science has produced wonderful tools like the Internet and my iPhone. And science is great when it leads to advances in heroic medicine.  But science has been a colossal failure when it comes to "feeding the world" and I believe it will continue to be a failure if we follow guidance such as yours.  Industrial agriculture is literally killing our topsoil and making our bodies unhealthy....

Ah, you read me wrong there Mr Dave.
I told you why industrial agriculture is killing the soil. It's the chemicals. There are large farms using organic growing principles which revitalize the soil food web and reaping big benefits. Production goes up significantly, the nutritional quality and taste of the food improves. Farmers need less fertilizer and pesticides. Win - win. Get it now?

This kind of organic growing is yet another gift from life science. If you only see the failures and never the successes of life sciences then you are blind. Don't be blind.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 15, 2016, 08:06:53 AM
Barbara McClintock is an example of a woman who was far smarter than me.  I'm sure there are many other examples. Who did you have in mind?
I have in mind the "gals" you are talking too here.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 08:07:57 AM
Borealis pontificating about the Masai. Setting Price straight.

:facepalm:
Not me, but modern scientists who study the same people Price, with his early 1900s white man attitudes and beliefs, briefly looked at in the 1930s.

It's you who insists on worshipping at the feet of a dentist who died in 1948, many of whose notions have been debunked thoroughly and were questioned even in his own era.

If you had the common sense your presumed god gave you, you'd stop being so arrogant and so fixated on your own prideful ignorance and actually try to learn something. Discernment is not one of your talents.
"Debunked Price"

Lol

So was Hujoels wrong for citing Price in support of his points?  You know that 2009 paper in the Journal of Dentistry that I've linked to about 10 times?

And, apparently you still have not comprehended that paper or the citation to Price therein. Despite numerous attempts to educate you.

What's amazing is your believing that a singular citation to Price on a very specific issue somehow validates everything Price wrote. It does not. Anymore than citing Newton on Optics validates his work in Alchemy.

If you want to refute the paper Bor cited, then do so, but don't go on trying to bolster Price with minor citations.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 15, 2016, 08:29:09 AM
Well it looks like the thread morphed into an 'anything Dave goes' one. Good. We don't need more dave threads- one is enough.
Science is great in fields other than the life sciences.
And why do you think that is? Are all other scientists, in all other fields, actually humble, unbiased and hard-working pioneers that carefully apply scientific methods to the benefit of mankind... And it's only in Life Sciences that scientists become biased and delusional magalomaniacs, who rape Nature for their own glory and pride?
 Why and how does that happen? Is it Satan's doing? Is it the Ghost of Darwin doing the will of his Dark Master? Is it the fumes from the Petri dishes? What?

How does that work in your mind, exactly? I'm curious.
Quote
Science has produced wonderful tools like the Internet and my iPhone. And science is great when it leads to advances in heroic medicine.
You DO realize that "Heroic" medicine is only an aspect of Medicine, right? ALSO a life science?
So... How come all those mighty Pathologists and Surgeons, with the power to fight Disease and keep Death at bay, don' become raging egomaniacs, but all those nerdy perfessors who spend their lives buried under books or looking down a microscope, eventually become the Despotic Tyrants of Mankind?

...You haven't really given this much thought, have you?
Quote
[Snip narcissistic delirium]  Not everyone will do so of course and there will always be the parasites in society who don't want to spend the two hours of labor per day to produce their own food and instead want to be fed with a silver spoon.  I will always be shining a spotlight on people like that and exposing them for the parasites that they truly are.
Ouch. So it seems like, in Davetopia, people who don't produce their own food will be "exposed" as "parasites".

Have you written your Little RedBrown Book yet, dave?



Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 08:34:52 AM
Science is great in fields other than the life sciences.  Science has produced wonderful tools like the Internet and my iPhone. And science is great when it leads to advances in heroic medicine.  But science has been a colossal failure when it comes to "feeding the world" and I believe it will continue to be a failure if we follow guidance such as yours.  Industrial agriculture is literally killing our topsoil and making our bodies unhealthy....

Ah, you read me wrong there Mr Dave.
I told you why industrial agriculture is killing the soil. It's the chemicals. There are large farms using organic growing principles which revitalize the soil food web and reaping big benefits. Production goes up significantly, the nutritional quality and taste of the food improves. Farmers need less fertilizer and pesticides. Win - win. Get it now?

This kind of organic growing is yet another gift from life science. If you only see the failures and never the successes of life sciences then you are blind. Don't be blind.
The problem is not just "the chemicals."  Another huge problem is crop selection.  And growing monocultures is another huge problem.  The huge amount of labor required is yet another problem.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 15, 2016, 08:40:40 AM
Borealis pontificating about the Masai. Setting Price straight.

:facepalm:
Dr. Dave Jekyll: "Your 'fancy degrees' and credentials mean nothing to me! I only care about what you write".

Mr. Dave Hyde: "A manipulative bitch mere woman person on the internet, dare to question Price? PRICE? Preposterous"!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 15, 2016, 08:43:05 AM
You people are supposed to have advanced science degrees (or at least have a clue about science) and you just constantly post bullshit. It's amazing!
Well, at least with you, there's no contradiction whatsoever- You deliver what everyone expects an uneducated blowhard to deliver.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 15, 2016, 08:47:35 AM
Borealis pontificating about the Masai. Setting Price straight.

:facepalm:
Instead of being a "good scientist, Hawkins-style" - i.e. accepting everything he wrote as gospel truth and not even thinking about questioning it. Imagine that.

Such a buffoon.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 15, 2016, 08:48:48 AM
You gals are so clueless that it almost hurts to watch.
Yeah, it really bites some men when the women folk are smarter than they are.

You women should have never been let out of your cages!

Round em back up Dave.
Barbara McClintock is an example of a woman who was far smarter than me.
How the hell would you know?
I'm pretty sure you've never read so much as a single paper she wrote.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 15, 2016, 08:52:27 AM
Borealis pontificating about the Masai. Setting Price straight.

:facepalm:
Not me, but modern scientists who study the same people Price, with his early 1900s white man attitudes and beliefs, briefly looked at in the 1930s.

It's you who insists on worshipping at the feet of a dentist who died in 1948, many of whose notions have been debunked thoroughly and were questioned even in his own era.

If you had the common sense your presumed god gave you, you'd stop being so arrogant and so fixated on your own prideful ignorance and actually try to learn something. Discernment is not one of your talents.
"Debunked Price"

Lol

So was Hujoels wrong for citing Price in support of his points?  You know that 2009 paper in the Journal of Dentistry that I've linked to about 10 times?
You think citing his paper is the same thing as certifying that everything he wrote was correct.
Did Hujoel [sic] specifically cite the details of the Masai diet?

You see, this is why people call you an idiot.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 15, 2016, 08:54:28 AM
You people are supposed to have advanced science degrees (or at least have a clue about science) and you just constantly post bullshit.
Cite one example of "bullshit" that's been posted here by someone other than yourself.
But don't bother unless you can support the charge that it IS "bullshit".

Otherwise, consider your bluff called, and you folded.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 15, 2016, 09:02:37 AM
  Patricia Richardson talks about doing this the organic way in this Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKqHNzWxek

Would that be Dr. Patricia Richardson, PhD, life scientist at the University of Texas?

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 15, 2016, 09:03:45 AM
Science is great in fields other than the life sciences. 
Like geology, for instance?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 15, 2016, 09:34:01 AM
Borealis pontificating about the Masai. Setting Price straight.

:facepalm:
Not me, but modern scientists who study the same people Price, with his early 1900s white man attitudes and beliefs, briefly looked at in the 1930s.

It's you who insists on worshipping at the feet of a dentist who died in 1948, many of whose notions have been debunked thoroughly and were questioned even in his own era.

If you had the common sense your presumed god gave you, you'd stop being so arrogant and so fixated on your own prideful ignorance and actually try to learn something. Discernment is not one of your talents.
"Debunked Price"

Lol

So was Hujoels wrong for citing Price in support of his points?  You know that 2009 paper in the Journal of Dentistry that I've linked to about 10 times?
And we've pointed our about 50 times that you don't understand that paper.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 15, 2016, 09:58:49 AM
  Patricia Richardson talks about doing this the organic way in this Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKqHNzWxek

Would that be Dr. Patricia Richardson, PhD, life scientist at the University of Texas?


I'm intrigued to know whether Dave thinks that Dr Richardson thinks that the "form of nitrogen" that the protazoans poop out ("in the organic way") in a form that is "available to plants" is organic or inorganic.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 15, 2016, 10:00:35 AM
Borealis pontificating about the Masai. Setting Price straight.

:facepalm:
Not me, but modern scientists who study the same people Price, with his early 1900s white man attitudes and beliefs, briefly looked at in the 1930s.

It's you who insists on worshipping at the feet of a dentist who died in 1948, many of whose notions have been debunked thoroughly and were questioned even in his own era.

If you had the common sense your presumed god gave you, you'd stop being so arrogant and so fixated on your own prideful ignorance and actually try to learn something. Discernment is not one of your talents.
"Debunked Price"

Lol
Dishonest Dave just can't help himself.
Even when the evidence of his reflexive dishonesty is right there, in the very post he quotes - embedded right there in his own post.

Notice that, sandwiched between "quote marks" is a pair of words that does not occur in Borealis's post:
Quote
"Debunked Price"

Of course, what Borealis actually wrote was
Quote
It's you who insists on worshipping at the feet of a dentist who died in 1948, many of whose notions have been debunked thoroughly and were questioned even in his own era.

Of course, if he had acknowledged what she actually said, the idiocy of citing "Hujoels"'  [sic] citation of some aspect of Price's observations as validation of everything he wrote, would have been glaringly self-evident.

So Dishonest Dave went reflexively for the misquote.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 15, 2016, 10:01:01 AM
You gals are so clueless that it almost hurts to watch.
Yeah, it really bites some men when the women folk are smarter than they are.

You women should have never been let out of your cages!

Round em back up Dave.
Barbara McClintock is an example of a woman who was far smarter than me.
How the hell would you know?
I'm pretty sure you've never read so much as a single paper she wrote.
Although for once, he's right. Barbara McClintock is a very good example of a woman who was far smarter than Dave.

That's probably true of most Nobel Prize-winners.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 10:02:54 AM
You people are supposed to have advanced science degrees (or at least have a clue about science) and you just constantly post bullshit. It's amazing!
Well, at least with you, there's no contradiction whatsoever- You deliver what everyone expects an uneducated blowhard to deliver.
I'm not entirely behind that statement. There was a time when Bluffy did deliver as advertised, but as has been noted, he's fallen off. Mostly now it's the same old shit recycled once again, interspersed with tired old bluff and bluster with maybe a dash of worn out blathering bravado. If it weren't free, I'd be asking for a refund.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 15, 2016, 10:09:27 AM
Quote
"No one ever fertilized an old growth forest.".
Humans, not so much. Millions of animals, from tiny worms to mice and birds to skunks and deer do. Did you know dust storms from Africa fertilise the Amazon?
heh

Yes, he does.

What he doesn't know is what "fertilize" means.  I keep asking him, but he won't say.
"Fertilize" (plants) means "feed" or "make food available" to plants.  Patricia Richardson talks about doing this the organic way in this Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKqHNzWxek  She says that humans have a C/N ratio of about 30:1, nematodes are about 15:1 and bacteria are only 5:1 ... so she says that having lots of bacteria in your soil is how you get lots of nitrogen in your soil.  BUT ... the nitrogen in soil bacteris is not AVAILABLE to plants.  So God created a neat little creature called a protozoan which runs around all day eating bacteria and ...

... pooping out the perfect form of nitrogen for plants.

I'm sure a similar conversation could be had for potassium and phosphorus and all the trace minerals needed for plants.
And what is that "form of nitrogen", Dave?




Don't know.  Don't care.  I'm a holistic manager, remember?
No, you are an ignorant blowhard.  You were the one talking about the "perfect form of nitrogen" and how it was pooped out of protozoa, and apparently not from bacteria.  But you can't even say what it is.

So you have no way of knowing whether Patricia Richardson has a case or not.
No I actually AM a holistic farm manager because I am actually managing food producing animals holistically and actually feeding myself some of the most healthy food to be found anywhere on the planet by doing so. 


In that case I actually AM a holistic farm manager too, because I am actually managing food producing plants holistically and actually feeding myself some of the most healthy food (http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?tname=foodspice&dbid=44) to be found anywhere on the planet by doing so.


Quote
You on the other hand are not managing any animals holistically.
No, I prefer eating plants. I think they are healthier, and better for the planet.

Quote
Instead, you are sitting in your plush armchair  in your ivory tower at the University of Nottingham trying to armchair quarterback me  with no knowledge whatsoever of what you're talking about and pretending you know something about the science  that I am involved in.

 :unsure: 

Quote
And with each post I see more and more evidence that you don't have a clue about the science  that I am deeply involved in,  and I wonder whether you know much about science in general.  Fancy degrees do not convince me that you are a good scientist. What comes out of your keyboard is what will convince me.

The only thing that convinces you, Dave, are words that appear to you to support what you have already concluded.

Quote
There is absolutely no need whatsoever for me to know the answer to the question that you posed. 
So why did you bother to say that stuff, then?  If you have no idea what it means?

Quote
Patricia Richardson gave us some interesting information, but I don't think you have a clue as to how that information should be used,  based on the question that you asked.  One great purpose of this information from Patricia Richardson is to increase our awe and respect of mother nature, and  hopefully inspire us to work WITH her more diligently instead of working against her.

You are such a phoney.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 10:10:41 AM
You gals are so clueless that it almost hurts to watch.
Yeah, it really bites some men when the women folk are smarter than they are.

You women should have never been let out of your cages!

Round em back up Dave.
Barbara McClintock is an example of a woman who was far smarter than me.
How the hell would you know?
I'm pretty sure you've never read so much as a single paper she wrote.
Depends on your definition of "read". I believe you are referring to the common definition, but it's possible, indeed probable, Bluffy would prefer his Bluffoonition: he's skimmed some bits and pieces, mostly stuff quoted by others, and ran across some references to McClintock being a maverick. At which point Bluffy figured since he's a maverick too, he already understands what all she's written, probably pretty much what he'd have written but using scientific terms.

And that's another interesting characteristic of Bluffy, RexT, Bluffy's characterization of clear concise language and terminology as used in scientific papers as Reverse Swahili Pig Latin. Which is a major reason he doesn't read it in the first place.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 10:13:08 AM
  Patricia Richardson talks about doing this the organic way in this Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REKqHNzWxek

Would that be Dr. Patricia Richardson, PhD, life scientist at the University of Texas?

Yes. Obviously not someone Bluffy could or should trust, being completely corrupted and brainwashed by the Octohatterii.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 10:18:49 AM
You gals are so clueless that it almost hurts to watch.
Yeah, it really bites some men when the women folk are smarter than they are.

You women should have never been let out of your cages!

Round em back up Dave.
Barbara McClintock is an example of a woman who was far smarter than me.
How the hell would you know?
I'm pretty sure you've never read so much as a single paper she wrote.
Although for once, he's right. Barbara McClintock is a very good example of a woman who was far smarter than Dave.

That's probably true of most Nobel Prize-winners.

Not just, probably true of most of the population out there, including most of the Ignoble Award winners and even some of the Darwin Awardees.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 15, 2016, 10:20:49 AM
Dave, there's a ted talk called something like how mushrooms can save the world. You would like it. It's one of my favorite ted talks.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: DaveGodfrey on June 15, 2016, 12:42:07 PM
Although for once, he's right. Barbara McClintock is a very good example of a woman who was far smarter than Dave.

That's probably true of most Nobel Prize-winners.

Not just, probably true of most of the population out there, including most of the Ignoble Award winners and even some of the Darwin Awardees.

Many of the more recent Ignoble winners are doing sensible if slightly odd research- for instance if you're working on an archaeological site and you're worried that it might have been disturbed by animals digging in the soil it would be quite useful to know how serious a problem this might be, and how easy it is to tell that its happened. So you get a paper called "The role of armadillos in the movement of archaeological materials: An experimental approach".

It would be nice if Bluffy was doing something comparable to this, but that's hardly likely. For one thing he'd have to be able to identify the possibility that he might be wrong about something.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Photon on June 15, 2016, 03:56:40 PM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: osmanthus on June 15, 2016, 04:06:31 PM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

Yebbut but being kept in a cage will drive the goats wild, see?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Photon on June 15, 2016, 04:08:03 PM
No I actually AM a holistic farm manager because I am actually managing food producing animals holistically

Bloat your goats, holistically.

Quote
and actually feeding myself some of the most healthy food to be found anywhere on the planet by doing so. 
Yes, a diet almost exclusively of saturated fats and cholesterol from mostly raw milk and meat consumption is some of the best stuff on the planet, at inducing heart disease.

Quote
You on the other hand are not managing any animals holistically.

This is the true measure of a human's worth, after all.

Quote
Instead, you are sitting in your plush armchair  in your ivory tower at the University of Nottingham trying to armchair quarterback me 

I think you mean "plush armchair quarterback", be sure to be consistently dismissive with your misinformed insults, Dave.

Quote
with no knowledge whatsoever of what you're talking about and pretending you know something about the science  that I am involved in. And with each post I see more and more evidence that you don't have a clue about the science  that I am deeply involved in,

You went from "involved" to "deeply involved" in one sentence.  I look forward to the next superlative. I suggest "gapingly involved", or "cavernously involved" or "carnivorously involved", or "carcinogenically involved" until the climax "unfathomably opaquely involved".  You gotta build your self up to it, Dave, measure your narcissism out in palatable doses.

Quote
and I wonder whether you know much about science in general.  Fancy degrees do not convince me that you are a good scientist. What comes out of your keyboard is what will convince me.

Sometimes stuff comes out of me onto my keyboard in convincing fashion.  The keyboard rarely returns the favour, however.

Quote
There is absolutely no need whatsoever for me to know the answer to the question that you posed. 

Right, why engage in study of the actual real world?  Fantasy is so much easier, and when you filter your data to count only the hits, you can confirm everything though pre-selected bias too!  It works in a nice, self-referential circle that admits no flaws, or external agreement with objective reality.  Woo hoo!

Quote
Patricia Richardson gave us some interesting information, but I don't think you have a clue as to how that information should be used,  based on the question that you asked.  One great purpose of this information from Patricia Richardson is to increase our awe and respect of mother nature, and  hopefully inspire us to work WITH her more diligently instead of working against her.

If u ain't wit us, yur agin' us.

Mission accomplished.

Heckuva job Brownie.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 05:29:42 PM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

The most important aspects of "wildness" with respect to what I am interested in - healthy food production - include the following ... (1)  their diet  (2)  the manner in which their feces is disposed of  (3)  their happiness/well-being/ freedom from disease

Ok?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 15, 2016, 05:52:53 PM
No. There's nothing natural about how you are treating your goats.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 05:58:06 PM
Lol
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 15, 2016, 06:10:04 PM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

Yebbut but being kept in a cage will drive the goats wild, see?
It actually might. And goats never, ever forget who they hate. Once you've pissed off a goat, you need to watch your back forever.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 06:13:16 PM
 I get the feeling that you have never had any goats. Or if you had some, you must have abused them.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 15, 2016, 06:42:10 PM
I grew up in goat country. But no, they weren't ours. THank god.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 15, 2016, 06:51:38 PM
lol

Dilettante Dave now imagines himself an expert on goat husbandry

(... and agronomy,
and immunology,
and microbiology,
and genetics,
and paleontology,
and geology,
and...
well, pretty much everything!)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 15, 2016, 07:14:21 PM
I grew up in goat country. But no, they weren't ours. THank god.
Yes I'm familiar with goats raised in unhappy ways.  Heck I did it myself in the past.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 08:01:34 PM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

The most important aspects of "wildness" with respect to what I am interested in - healthy food production - include the following ... (1)  their diet  (2)  the manner in which their feces is disposed of  (3)  their happiness/well-being/ freedom from disease

Ok?

Where does Price state that in his writings?

Matter of fact, did you ever buy them from the Price Club or download the collection linked to by Pingu? So you could read them, if you had a mind to.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 08:04:34 PM
I grew up in goat country. But no, they weren't ours. THank god.
Yes I'm familiar with goats raised in unhappy ways.  Heck I did it myself in the past.

See, Vox, Bluffy is an expert in goat husbandry. He knows how to abuse them.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 08:09:07 PM
Anyway, Bluffy, are you ever going to get back to the subject of this thread, you know, the greening of deserts? Which, currently it appears they are pretty much all doing and have been for the past decade or so.

Or would you rather ignore that? Like you do most information that blows your fantasies away?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Photon on June 15, 2016, 09:53:39 PM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

The most important aspects of "wildness" with respect to what I am interested in - healthy food production - include the following ... (1)  their diet  (2)  the manner in which their feces is disposed of  (3)  their happiness/well-being/ freedom from disease

Ok?

In the wild:

(1) animals get what they can, when they can.  They don't get hand-picked browsing material with no self-selection, shoved in a tiny wire cage by a 50+ year-old blowhard who is convinced he's right about saving the world

(2) their feces is scattered wherever and whenever they move and browse.  it is not piled in and stomped on in a tiny cage, for some probably single digit number of hours, only to be dragged to a new location to shit and stomp all over again

(3) animals may not have a quantifiable happiness level.  At any rate you are incapable of judging happiness or well being considering your flailure with confusing a ~"giant happy belly" with your prowess at animal husbandry when really you should have diagnosed bloat.  Your cockamamie paradigm where you don't actually provide veterinary care for your animals also disqualifies you as keeping them free from disease.  They may be disease-free now, but they won't stay that way with their cramped conditions, lay-where-you-shit forcible confinement, and pathological-fear-of-veterinary-care-all-science caregiver.  Nor will their current milk production be sustainable under those conditions.  But maybe then you'll just congratulate those "happiest goats in the world", by letting them grace the inside of your soup tureen.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Photon on June 15, 2016, 09:55:48 PM
I grew up in goat country. But no, they weren't ours. THank god.
Yes I'm familiar with goats raised in unhappy ways.  Heck I did it myself in the past.

Yesterday and the last few months are also in the past.  Congrats.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Photon on June 15, 2016, 09:57:48 PM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

The most important aspects of "wildness" with respect to what I am interested in - healthy food production - include the following ... (1)  their diet  (2)  the manner in which their feces is disposed of  (3)  their happiness/well-being/ freedom from disease

Ok?

In the wild:

(1) animals get what they can, when they can.  They don't get hand-picked browsing material with no self-selection, shoved in a tiny wire cage by a 50+ year-old blowhard who is convinced he's right about saving the world

(2) their feces is scattered wherever and whenever they move and browse.  it is not piled in and stomped on in a tiny cage, for some probably single digit number of hours, only to be dragged to a new location to shit and stomp all over again

(3) animals may not have a quantifiable happiness level.  At any rate you are incapable of judging happiness or well being considering your flailure with confusing a ~"giant happy belly" with your prowess at animal husbandry when really you should have diagnosed bloat.  Your cockamamie paradigm where you don't actually provide veterinary care for your animals also disqualifies you as keeping them free from disease.  They may be disease-free now, but they won't stay that way with their cramped conditions, lay-where-you-shit forcible confinement, and pathological-fear-of-veterinary-care-all-science caregiver.  Nor will their current milk production be sustainable under those conditions.  But maybe then you'll just congratulate those "happiest goats in the world", by letting them grace the inside of your soup tureen.


Dave.  If you think what you are doing is natural, then it is obvious you've never watched goats in the wild.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 15, 2016, 11:56:41 PM
I still want to hear from Bluffy how he squares his belief desertification is occurring on a massive level when the google list I posted indicates very strongly deserts are shrinking and greening.

I want to know if he even looked at any of those links.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 16, 2016, 03:24:20 AM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

The most important aspects of "wildness" with respect to what I am interested in - healthy food production - include the following ... (1)  their diet  (2)  the manner in which their feces is disposed of  (3)  their happiness/well-being/ freedom from disease

Ok?

In the wild:

(1) animals get what they can, when they can.  They don't get hand-picked browsing material with no self-selection, shoved in a tiny wire cage by a 50+ year-old blowhard who is convinced he's right about saving the world

(2) their feces is scattered wherever and whenever they move and browse.  it is not piled in and stomped on in a tiny cage, for some probably single digit number of hours, only to be dragged to a new location to shit and stomp all over again

(3) animals may not have a quantifiable happiness level.  At any rate you are incapable of judging happiness or well being considering your flailure with confusing a ~"giant happy belly" with your prowess at animal husbandry when really you should have diagnosed bloat.  Your cockamamie paradigm where you don't actually provide veterinary care for your animals also disqualifies you as keeping them free from disease.  They may be disease-free now, but they won't stay that way with their cramped conditions, lay-where-you-shit forcible confinement, and pathological-fear-of-veterinary-care-all-science caregiver.  Nor will their current milk production be sustainable under those conditions.  But maybe then you'll just congratulate those "happiest goats in the world", by letting them grace the inside of your soup tureen.

This is the kind of stupidity (from real scientists) that keeps me coming back.  It's really like watching one of those 1800s vintage train wrecks!  Sometime you really should learn about animals in the true wild (which doesn't exist in very many places in the world anymore, if anywhere)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 16, 2016, 03:26:42 AM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

The most important aspects of "wildness" with respect to what I am interested in - healthy food production - include the following ... (1)  their diet  (2)  the manner in which their feces is disposed of  (3)  their happiness/well-being/ freedom from disease

Ok?

In the wild:

(1) animals get what they can, when they can.  They don't get hand-picked browsing material with no self-selection, shoved in a tiny wire cage by a 50+ year-old blowhard who is convinced he's right about saving the world

(2) their feces is scattered wherever and whenever they move and browse.  it is not piled in and stomped on in a tiny cage, for some probably single digit number of hours, only to be dragged to a new location to shit and stomp all over again

(3) animals may not have a quantifiable happiness level.  At any rate you are incapable of judging happiness or well being considering your flailure with confusing a ~"giant happy belly" with your prowess at animal husbandry when really you should have diagnosed bloat.  Your cockamamie paradigm where you don't actually provide veterinary care for your animals also disqualifies you as keeping them free from disease.  They may be disease-free now, but they won't stay that way with their cramped conditions, lay-where-you-shit forcible confinement, and pathological-fear-of-veterinary-care-all-science caregiver.  Nor will their current milk production be sustainable under those conditions.  But maybe then you'll just congratulate those "happiest goats in the world", by letting them grace the inside of your soup tureen.


Dave.  If you think what you are doing is natural, then it is obvious you've never watched goats in the wild.
I'm pretty sure you never have either.  I'm not aware of any places in the world where there are enough predators around to keep animals really herded tightly together and constantly on the move.  Man has "unwilded" most of the world.  It's sad.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 16, 2016, 05:33:59 AM
I'm pretty sure you never have either.  I'm not aware of any places in the world where there are enough predators around to keep animals really herded tightly together and constantly on the move.  Man has "unwilded" most of the world.  It's sad.
There never were any such places in the wild.  It's all fantasy.

What's your evidence for such places?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 16, 2016, 06:29:41 AM
SOIL PROTOZOA  By Elaine R. Ingham, Oregon State University (https://extension.illinois.edu/soil/SoilBiology/protozoa.htm):

Quote
Protozoa play an important role in mineralizing nutrients, making them available for use by plants and other soil organisms. Protozoa (and nematodes) have a lower concentration of nitrogen in their cells than the bacteria they eat. (The ratio of carbon to nitrogen for protozoa is 10:1 or much more and 3:1 to 10:1 for bacteria.)  Bacteria eaten by protozoa contain too much nitrogen for the amount of carbon protozoa need. They release the excess nitrogen in the form of ammonium (NH4+). This usually occurs near the root system of a plant. Bacteria and other organisms rapidly take up most of the ammonium, but some is used by the plant. (See figure for explanation of mineralization and immobilzation.)

Soil Test Results: What Do They Mean? (http://www.noble.org/ag/soils/soiltestresults/):

Quote
The nitrogen test measures the amount of nitrate in the soil for the next crop. Things to remember are:
Quote
  • nitrate is water-soluble and can move out of the root zone,
  • the test does not account for a previous legume crop,
  • the test does not measure recently applied anhydrous ammonia, and
  • the test will not show nitrogen from manure until the manure has broken down.
SO:

This editor truly blows.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 16, 2016, 06:40:10 AM
What problems are you encountering with the editor, Jon? I've encountered a couple myself, but most of my problems initially were due to unfamiliarity. Still a few things I don't like.

1. If you have two sequential quotes, you can't get the cursor between them to reply to them separately.
2. Cursor placement is restricted in other ways - you can't just click in the box, you have to click specifically where you want to start typing.
3. You can't use your shift key to highlight text, it either deletes the text or takes you to the beginning of all text in the box.

If you can add some things I'll copy it to a more appropriate thread and see what Os and Raven have to say.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 16, 2016, 06:41:40 AM
This is the kind of stupidity (from real scientists) that keeps me coming back.  It's really like watching one of those 1800s vintage train wrecks!  Sometime you really should learn about animals in the true wild (which doesn't exist in very many places in the world anymore, if anywhere)
Apparently, dave has named his goat-cage "The True Wild".

I'm sure the sign is in a nice brown color, that 'blends in' the way he likes it.

 :p
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 16, 2016, 06:46:20 AM
Dave.  If you think what you are doing is natural, then it is obvious you've never watched goats in the wild.
I'm pretty sure you never have either.
Think again. I, for one, am sure that I've watched the behavior of goats way more than you, Mr. "I've :airquote: owned :airquote:  goats before".
Quote
I'm not aware of any places in the world where there are enough predators around to keep animals really herded tightly together and constantly on the move.
Well, we agree on something. Although for different reasons, I suspect.  ::)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 16, 2016, 06:53:56 AM
What problems are you encountering with the editor, Jon? I've encountered a couple myself, but most of my problems initially were due to unfamiliarity. Still a few things I don't like.

1. If you have two sequential quotes, you can't get the cursor between them to reply to them separately.
2. Cursor placement is restricted in other ways - you can't just click in the box, you have to click specifically where you want to start typing.
3. You can't use your shift key to highlight text, it either deletes the text or takes you to the beginning of all text in the box.

If you can add some things I'll copy it to a more appropriate thread and see what Os and Raven have to say.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 16, 2016, 06:57:02 AM
Thanks Jon. I'll repost in a more relevant thread.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 16, 2016, 07:40:13 AM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

The most important aspects of "wildness" with respect to what I am interested in - healthy food production - include the following ... (1)  their diet  (2)  the manner in which their feces is disposed of  (3)  their happiness/well-being/ freedom from disease

Ok?

In the wild:

(1) animals get what they can, when they can.  They don't get hand-picked browsing material with no self-selection, shoved in a tiny wire cage by a 50+ year-old blowhard who is convinced he's right about saving the world

(2) their feces is scattered wherever and whenever they move and browse.  it is not piled in and stomped on in a tiny cage, for some probably single digit number of hours, only to be dragged to a new location to shit and stomp all over again

(3) animals may not have a quantifiable happiness level.  At any rate you are incapable of judging happiness or well being considering your flailure with confusing a ~"giant happy belly" with your prowess at animal husbandry when really you should have diagnosed bloat.  Your cockamamie paradigm where you don't actually provide veterinary care for your animals also disqualifies you as keeping them free from disease.  They may be disease-free now, but they won't stay that way with their cramped conditions, lay-where-you-shit forcible confinement, and pathological-fear-of-veterinary-care-all-science caregiver.  Nor will their current milk production be sustainable under those conditions.  But maybe then you'll just congratulate those "happiest goats in the world", by letting them grace the inside of your soup tureen.

This is the kind of stupidity (from real scientists) that keeps me coming back.  It's really like watching one of those 1800s vintage train wrecks!  Sometime you really should learn about animals in the true wild (which doesn't exist in very many places in the world anymore, if anywhere)
More vague generalities and opinions supported by nothing. Typical Bluffy.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 16, 2016, 07:43:25 AM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

The most important aspects of "wildness" with respect to what I am interested in - healthy food production - include the following ... (1)  their diet  (2)  the manner in which their feces is disposed of  (3)  their happiness/well-being/ freedom from disease

Ok?

In the wild:

(1) animals get what they can, when they can.  They don't get hand-picked browsing material with no self-selection, shoved in a tiny wire cage by a 50+ year-old blowhard who is convinced he's right about saving the world

(2) their feces is scattered wherever and whenever they move and browse.  it is not piled in and stomped on in a tiny cage, for some probably single digit number of hours, only to be dragged to a new location to shit and stomp all over again

(3) animals may not have a quantifiable happiness level.  At any rate you are incapable of judging happiness or well being considering your flailure with confusing a ~"giant happy belly" with your prowess at animal husbandry when really you should have diagnosed bloat.  Your cockamamie paradigm where you don't actually provide veterinary care for your animals also disqualifies you as keeping them free from disease.  They may be disease-free now, but they won't stay that way with their cramped conditions, lay-where-you-shit forcible confinement, and pathological-fear-of-veterinary-care-all-science caregiver.  Nor will their current milk production be sustainable under those conditions.  But maybe then you'll just congratulate those "happiest goats in the world", by letting them grace the inside of your soup tureen.


Dave.  If you think what you are doing is natural, then it is obvious you've never watched goats in the wild.
I'm pretty sure you never have either.  I'm not aware of any places in the world where there are enough predators around to keep animals really herded tightly together and constantly on the move.  Man has "unwilded" most of the world.  It's sad.


Just repeating the same old bullshit about predators and prey doesn'tt work Bluffy. I know, I know it's all you've got but that's your problem, not anybody elses.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 16, 2016, 07:52:33 AM
Hey, Bluffy, why don't you want to talk about greening of deserts anymore?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 16, 2016, 08:38:57 AM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

The most important aspects of "wildness" with respect to what I am interested in - healthy food production - include the following ... (1)  their diet  (2)  the manner in which their feces is disposed of  (3)  their happiness/well-being/ freedom from disease

Ok?

In the wild:

(1) animals get what they can, when they can.  They don't get hand-picked browsing material with no self-selection, shoved in a tiny wire cage by a 50+ year-old blowhard who is convinced he's right about saving the world

(2) their feces is scattered wherever and whenever they move and browse.  it is not piled in and stomped on in a tiny cage, for some probably single digit number of hours, only to be dragged to a new location to shit and stomp all over again

(3) animals may not have a quantifiable happiness level.  At any rate you are incapable of judging happiness or well being considering your flailure with confusing a ~"giant happy belly" with your prowess at animal husbandry when really you should have diagnosed bloat.  Your cockamamie paradigm where you don't actually provide veterinary care for your animals also disqualifies you as keeping them free from disease.  They may be disease-free now, but they won't stay that way with their cramped conditions, lay-where-you-shit forcible confinement, and pathological-fear-of-veterinary-care-all-science caregiver.  Nor will their current milk production be sustainable under those conditions.  But maybe then you'll just congratulate those "happiest goats in the world", by letting them grace the inside of your soup tureen.

This is the kind of stupidity (from real scientists) that keeps me coming back.  It's really like watching one of those 1800s vintage train wrecks!  Sometime you really should learn about animals in the true wild (which doesn't exist in very many places in the world anymore, if anywhere)
This made me laugh out loud at you Dave. Thanks.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 16, 2016, 08:42:14 AM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

The most important aspects of "wildness" with respect to what I am interested in - healthy food production - include the following ... (1)  their diet  (2)  the manner in which their feces is disposed of  (3)  their happiness/well-being/ freedom from disease

Ok?

In the wild:

(1) animals get what they can, when they can.  They don't get hand-picked browsing material with no self-selection, shoved in a tiny wire cage by a 50+ year-old blowhard who is convinced he's right about saving the world

(2) their feces is scattered wherever and whenever they move and browse.  it is not piled in and stomped on in a tiny cage, for some probably single digit number of hours, only to be dragged to a new location to shit and stomp all over again

(3) animals may not have a quantifiable happiness level.  At any rate you are incapable of judging happiness or well being considering your flailure with confusing a ~"giant happy belly" with your prowess at animal husbandry when really you should have diagnosed bloat.  Your cockamamie paradigm where you don't actually provide veterinary care for your animals also disqualifies you as keeping them free from disease.  They may be disease-free now, but they won't stay that way with their cramped conditions, lay-where-you-shit forcible confinement, and pathological-fear-of-veterinary-care-all-science caregiver.  Nor will their current milk production be sustainable under those conditions.  But maybe then you'll just congratulate those "happiest goats in the world", by letting them grace the inside of your soup tureen.


Dave.  If you think what you are doing is natural, then it is obvious you've never watched goats in the wild.
I'm pretty sure you never have either.  I'm not aware of any places in the world where there are enough predators around to keep animals really herded tightly together and constantly on the move.  Man has "unwilded" most of the world.  It's sad.
You should Google "wild goat Olympic national park".

 But you clearly don't understand how wild goats work and domestic goats are bred to have a shepherd.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 16, 2016, 08:47:01 AM
Hey, Bluffy, why don't you want to talk about greening of deserts anymore?
Because he realised he had no response to any of the points made.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 16, 2016, 08:50:59 AM
I don't think Dave's ever understood an animal in his life. He essentially treats/talks about them like brainless moving objects motivated by a very small set of instinctive behaviours, no more complex than a sunflower following the sun. I don't think he comprehends what people even mean when we talk about how badly he's treating his goats. He can't imagine why we think it's wrong.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 16, 2016, 08:55:49 AM
Well, he treats people like that, so it's not surprising he treats animals like that.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 16, 2016, 09:12:32 AM
Well, he treats people like that, so it's not surprising he treats animals like that.
That may be a tetch hyperbolic. He may not treat people irl like that, even if he seems to treat people online as if we were all some kind of AI.

But re animals - it was I think more or less common well into the 20th century for people to believe animals were essentially automatons, and therefore could be treated as such without the need for engaging any empathy. Of course there were lots of people who thought and acted differently.

I believe it's still a feature of some religious groups. My cousin's husband was chided by some of their fundamentalist sect members for being too concerned with his animals' comfort. Yet his family thought nothing of having, for years, a loose cat-eating dog despite having scads of barn cats, some of which were their children's pets. I know some Amish groups have been involved in puppy mills and abusive treatment of horses, and justify it with some perversion of the Biblical references to using/dominating animals/the earth. Though even the Bible warns about not beating your ox, etc.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Photon on June 16, 2016, 09:15:11 AM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

The most important aspects of "wildness" with respect to what I am interested in - healthy food production - include the following ... (1)  their diet  (2)  the manner in which their feces is disposed of  (3)  their happiness/well-being/ freedom from disease

Ok?

In the wild:

(1) animals get what they can, when they can.  They don't get hand-picked browsing material with no self-selection, shoved in a tiny wire cage by a 50+ year-old blowhard who is convinced he's right about saving the world

(2) their feces is scattered wherever and whenever they move and browse.  it is not piled in and stomped on in a tiny cage, for some probably single digit number of hours, only to be dragged to a new location to shit and stomp all over again

(3) animals may not have a quantifiable happiness level.  At any rate you are incapable of judging happiness or well being considering your flailure with confusing a ~"giant happy belly" with your prowess at animal husbandry when really you should have diagnosed bloat.  Your cockamamie paradigm where you don't actually provide veterinary care for your animals also disqualifies you as keeping them free from disease.  They may be disease-free now, but they won't stay that way with their cramped conditions, lay-where-you-shit forcible confinement, and pathological-fear-of-veterinary-care-all-science caregiver.  Nor will their current milk production be sustainable under those conditions.  But maybe then you'll just congratulate those "happiest goats in the world", by letting them grace the inside of your soup tureen.


Dave.  If you think what you are doing is natural, then it is obvious you've never watched goats in the wild.
I'm pretty sure you never have either.  I'm not aware of any places in the world where there are enough predators around to keep animals really herded tightly together and constantly on the move.  Man has "unwilded" most of the world.  It's sad.

Think again, jackass.

http://esrd.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/wild-species/mammals/wild-cattle-related/mountain-goat.aspx


Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Photon on June 16, 2016, 09:16:46 AM
And of course your idiotic predator model has nothing to do with the reality of the situation.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 16, 2016, 09:21:24 AM
Well, he treats people like that, so it's not surprising he treats animals like that.
That may be a tetch hyperbolic. He may not treat people irl like that, even if he seems to treat people online as if we were all some kind of AI.
Well, I was thinking of online people.  To be fair, he seems like a pretty good Dad to his daughter and son to his parents. But yeah, on the internet we might as well be bots.

Quote
But re animals - it was I think more or less common well into the 20th century for people to believe animals were essentially automatons, and therefore could be treated as such without the need for engaging any empathy. Of course there were lots of people who thought and acted differently.

Yes.  I don't know whether that figures into Dave's attitude.  I think his brand of Dominionism does, though.

Quote
I believe it's still a feature of some religious groups. My cousin's husband was chided by some of their fundamentalist sect members for being too concerned with his animals' comfort. Yet his family thought nothing of having, for years, a loose cat-eating dog despite having scads of barn cats, some of which were their children's pets. I know some Amish groups have been involved in puppy mills and abusive treatment of horses, and justify it with some perversion of the Biblical references to using/dominating animals/the earth. Though even the Bible warns about not beating your ox, etc.

I don't think Dave would willingly cause pain to his animals.  But he certainly doesn't treat them as though they have any needs above the bottom layer of Maslow's hierarchy. Not that Maslow's hierarchy necessarily reflects a hierarchy - which makes things worse, really.  It's possible, that for goats, as with people, needs from the top of the triangle trump those at the bottom, at least when really deprived.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 16, 2016, 09:23:32 AM
I've watched chamois in the Alps.  Not tightly bunched.  But pretty wild.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 16, 2016, 10:01:09 AM
And of course your idiotic predator model has nothing to do with the reality of the situation.
or of any situation
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 16, 2016, 10:20:46 AM
I don't think Dave's ever understood an animal in his life. He essentially treats/talks about them like brainless moving objects motivated by a very small set of instinctive behaviours, no more complex than a sunflower following the sun. I don't think he comprehends what people even mean when we talk about how badly he's treating his goats. He can't imagine why we think it's wrong.
Absolutely. It's dominionism. The only thing important about any organism is how directly useful it is to Man.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 16, 2016, 12:13:35 PM
Sad and sickly wild goats, struggling with their unnatural living conditions:

(http://www.worldbook.com/images/default-source/Animal-of-the-Day/mountain-goat/mountain-goats-jumping.tmb-1920x762.jpg?sfvrsn=2)



Depressed wild goat, pondering on the futility of "freedom" and longing for a nice goat tractor:

(http://naturecloseups.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/00071754.jpg)



...Aaaaand the Happiest, Healthiest Goats on the Planet, basking in the glow of their blissful Goatopia:

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/afbBOAvNRaI/hqdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: thatsneakyguy on June 16, 2016, 12:49:17 PM
Depressed wild goat, pondering on the futility of "freedom" and longing for a nice goat tractor:

(http://naturecloseups.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/00071754.jpg)

Lol, he does look like he is about to jump.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: osmanthus on June 16, 2016, 04:04:06 PM
Goats are smart. He's probably wondering how to build a hang glider.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 16, 2016, 05:01:43 PM
How would you guys rate "goat happiness"?  I've observed them both inside the pen and outside the pen and I can't tell any difference in their behavior.  In both situations they seem to have two enjoyable activities in mind - eating, and being around me.  They bleat rather loudly if they are out of food or out of water ( which has rarely happened) or if I walk away. ( less rare )
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 16, 2016, 06:28:48 PM
Price emphasizes the importance of "wild" animal based foods so much and goes out of his way to point out that the groups living entirely on plant foods are not healthy that one could title the book "wild animal-based foods: key to good health."

"Wild", like two domestic goats kept in an inappropriately small cage. 

The most important aspects of "wildness" with respect to what I am interested in - healthy food production - include the following ... (1)  their diet  (2)  the manner in which their feces is disposed of  (3)  their happiness/well-being/ freedom from disease

Ok?
But you refuse to give up various premises that are demonstrably wrong.

Do the flood legends of the Wai Wai tribe support the Biblical story of the Deluge?

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 16, 2016, 06:33:38 PM
How would you guys rate "goat happiness"?  I've observed them both inside the pen and outside the pen and I can't tell any difference in their behavior.  In both situations they seem to have two enjoyable activities in mind - eating, and being around me.  They bleat rather loudly if they are out of food or out of water ( which has rarely happened) or if I walk away. ( less rare )
IOW they don't do what goats do.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 16, 2016, 06:52:07 PM
But how would you assess their happiness?  Or lack thereof?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 16, 2016, 07:00:18 PM
By whether or not they do what goats do.

Your torture has broken them. They're dogs.

Congratulations on a job well done.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 16, 2016, 07:08:46 PM
Dave, I was wondering if you are more like me, mostly self-educated, or more like the others here who are mostly formally educated?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 16, 2016, 07:16:00 PM
By whether or not they do what goats do.

Your torture has broken them. They're dogs.

Congratulations on a job well done.
Torture.  Lol
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 16, 2016, 07:17:20 PM
Dave, I was wondering if you are more like me, mostly self-educated, or more like the others here who are mostly formally educated?
My only formal education was an EE degree in college.  I got it not for a career but because I was interested in the subject matter.  All my permaculture stuff is self-taught.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 16, 2016, 07:18:23 PM
"They're dogs."

First dogs in the history of the world to subsist entirely on tree leaves.

Lol

(And bleat)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 16, 2016, 07:21:28 PM
In other news, JonF has decided that the sky is green and grass is blue.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 16, 2016, 09:19:02 PM
My only formal education was an EE degree in college.  I got it not for a career but because I was interested in the subject matter.  All my permaculture stuff is self-taught.
Thanks, yeah I have a 2yr degree in architectural drafting and like you not for a career. The knowledge has nevertheless been invaluable to me.

I would guess you could say the same for your knowledge in electronics?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 16, 2016, 09:36:18 PM
In other news, JonF has decided that the sky is green and grass is blue.
I bet that if you Google the grue bleen paradox you won't get it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Doobie Keebler on June 16, 2016, 10:59:04 PM
It's amazing watching Dave fully uncork his narcissistic bullshitting and self-aggrandizement now that he figures he has a clean slate reboot. Enjoy it while it lasts, Dave, and pray TR's table doesn't get fixed and the site archived. :rofl:
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 17, 2016, 03:21:51 AM
My only formal education was an EE degree in college.  I got it not for a career but because I was interested in the subject matter.  All my permaculture stuff is self-taught.
Thanks, yeah I have a 2yr degree in architectural drafting and like you not for a career. The knowledge has nevertheless been invaluable to me.

I would guess you could say the same for your knowledge in electronics?
I'm glad that I understand electricity and basic electronics and basic programming and such, but I do think that the knowledge could be gained in better ways now in this Internet Age.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 17, 2016, 04:00:54 AM
Well, you've never shown much evidence that you understand electricity of basic electronics or basic programming.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 17, 2016, 04:12:49 AM
Well, you've never shown much evidence that you understand electricity of basic electronics or basic programming.
Yeah ... doing all my own wiring on 3 conventional houses ... creating a web based software platform for all of our sales reps all over the US which helped us sell our company for millions of $ does not constitute evidence of understanding basic electricity or basic programming.

Lol

Thanks again for a laugh.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 17, 2016, 04:14:18 AM
The darkening of minds here is simply astounding.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: MikeS on June 17, 2016, 04:43:36 AM
Dave,
Regardless of your talents, I would not hire you for anything.
Consider it a "trust" issue with me.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 17, 2016, 04:50:24 AM
But how would you assess their happiness?  Or lack thereof?
Quote from: Dave a few days ago
My goats are the happiest, healthiest goats on EARTH!!!!111one!
Quote from: Dave now
Um- How do I tell if goats happy?
Priceless.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 17, 2016, 05:04:55 AM
By whether or not they do what goats do.

Your torture has broken them. They're dogs.

Congratulations on a job well done.
Torture.  Lol
Torture, Davie-dipshit.  You've broken them.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 17, 2016, 05:08:33 AM
My only formal education was an EE degree in college.  I got it not for a career but because I was interested in the subject matter.  All my permaculture stuff is self-taught.
Thanks, yeah I have a 2yr degree in architectural drafting and like you not for a career. The knowledge has nevertheless been invaluable to me.

I would guess you could say the same for your knowledge in electronics?
He has no knowledge of electronics.  Some time ago he asked what "I" is in V = IR.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 17, 2016, 05:11:54 AM
"They're dogs."

First dogs in the history of the world to subsist entirely on tree leaves.

Lol

(And bleat)
Yup, you really are that stupid.

They are not literally dogs.

Duh.

They exhibit many of the behaviors of dogs because you've broken them by torture.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: thatsneakyguy on June 17, 2016, 05:14:00 AM
But how would you assess their happiness?  Or lack thereof?
Quote from: Dave a few days ago
My goats are the happiest, healthiest goats on EARTH!!!!111one!
Quote from: Dave now
Um- How do I tell if goats happy?
Priceless.


Uh oh Faid thinks he found some inconsistencies in Dave's ramblings. 
This is false of course, because Dave is never inconsistent. 

Clearly what has happened is that Faid has been afflicted with a severe case of DaveMustBeWrongismtm.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 17, 2016, 05:14:12 AM
The darkening of minds here is simply astounding.
Well take your blindfold off then.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 17, 2016, 05:15:03 AM
 Jon is a liar.  Of course I have known what the "I" is in V=IR for probably at least 35 years.  That's basic electricity, not electronics though.  And if you want to continue to slander me about me supposedly "torturing my goats" why don't you at least come visit and see for yourself first before you continue your slander.  And - Mike S - I wouldn't consider working for you ...  I don't even know who the hell you are. What a stupid comment.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 17, 2016, 05:17:50 AM
But how would you assess their happiness?  Or lack thereof?
Quote from: Dave a few days ago
My goats are the happiest, healthiest goats on EARTH!!!!111one!
Quote from: Dave now
Um- How do I tell if goats happy?
Priceless.


Uh oh Faid thinks he found some inconsistencies in Dave's ramblings. 
This is false of course, because Dave is never inconsistent. 

Clearly what has happened is that Faid has been afflicted with a severe case of DaveMustBeWrongismtm.
You guys can't even get the most simple things right. I didn't ask how *I* can tell if my goats are happy.  I obviously think I already know.  I asked how YOU would tell if they are happy.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 17, 2016, 05:24:39 AM
Aoogah! Aooogah! Bluster phase initiated!

Jon is a liar.  Of course I have known what the "I" is in V=IR for probably at least 35 years.
I remember it clearly.  Possibly I could be wrong, but lying requires intent to deceive and I do not intend to deceive.

Quote
That's basic electricity, not electronics though.
Yeah, you can know all about electronics without knowing V = IR.  You're so precious.

Quote
  And if you want to continue to slander me about me supposedly "torturing my goats" why don't you at least come visit and see for yourself first before you continue your slander.
Not necessary.  You've posted plenty of pictures and descriptions.  You've documented your shameful  treatment of your goats quite sufficiently.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 17, 2016, 05:27:20 AM
Jon is a liar. 
So you maintain that this is a lie:
Quote from: JonF
Some time ago he asked what "I" is in V = IR.

If and when the TR database is accessible again, we will see who is telling the truth.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 17, 2016, 05:29:50 AM
But how would you assess their happiness?  Or lack thereof?
Quote from: Dave a few days ago
My goats are the happiest, healthiest goats on EARTH!!!!111one!
Quote from: Dave now
Um- How do I tell if goats happy?
Priceless.


Uh oh Faid thinks he found some inconsistencies in Dave's ramblings. 
This is false of course, because Dave is never inconsistent. 

Clearly what has happened is that Faid has been afflicted with a severe case of DaveMustBeWrongismtm.
You guys can't even get the most simple things right. I didn't ask how *I* can tell if my goats are happy. I obviously think I already know.
And just as obviously you don't. You've made it all about your convenience and not at all about the goats' well-being. Totally empathyless and cruel.

Quote
I asked how YOU would tell if they are happy.
And I replied.  You made no relevant response.

Have you read the many descriptions of how to care for goats that have been posted?  Looked at the videos and pictures?

Of course not.  Goats have been domesticated for thousands of years but you are the only person in the world who knows how to care for them.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 17, 2016, 05:30:37 AM
Jon is a liar. 
So you maintain that this is a lie:
Quote from: JonF
Some time ago he asked what "I" is in V = IR.

If and when the TR database is accessible again, we will see who is telling the truth.
I think it was at IIDB or maybe even AtBC.  I'll have a look at the latter.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: MikeS on June 17, 2016, 06:18:50 AM
And - Mike S - I wouldn't consider working for you ...  I don't even know who the hell you are. What a stupid comment.
I'm "Mike PSS".
AND I am probably the MOST personally connected to you of any TR poster.
I had lunch with you in Kansas City, we went to McCormick and Schmick's at the Plaza.  You went on and on about continued testing of Zircons.
I had a phone conference with you and R.H.Brown about Carbon 14.  During that call you found out that Mr. Brown was an OEC (old earth, young creation).  We also found out that Mr. Brown's conversion curve was mistaken as I had shown you previous in the mass balance sheets we developed together.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 17, 2016, 06:21:47 AM
Lol!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 17, 2016, 06:28:30 AM
But how would you assess their happiness?  Or lack thereof?
Quote from: Dave a few days ago
My goats are the happiest, healthiest goats on EARTH!!!!111one!
Quote from: Dave now
Um- How do I tell if goats happy?
Priceless.


Uh oh Faid thinks he found some inconsistencies in Dave's ramblings. 
This is false of course, because Dave is never inconsistent. 

Clearly what has happened is that Faid has been afflicted with a severe case of DaveMustBeWrongismtm.
You guys can't even get the most simple things right. I didn't ask how *I* can tell if my goats are happy.  I obviously think I already know.  I asked how YOU would tell if they are happy.

Actually, Bluffy, you did ask "Um - How do I tell if goats [are] happy?" See bolded quote above.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: thatsneakyguy on June 17, 2016, 06:43:52 AM
You guys can't even get the most simple things right. I didn't ask how *I* can tell if my goats are happy.  I obviously think I already know.  I asked how YOU would tell if they are happy.

Before you switch topics, what about your question "Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?"

Don't you think that you should state whether you are satisfied with the responses to that question?

I mean, you honestly and sincerely wanted an answer to that question didn't you? 
You did want to talk about that and get an answer right?
This isn't some vanity thread for you to spout your ideas right?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: thatsneakyguy on June 17, 2016, 06:44:49 AM
Actually, Bluffy, you did ask "Um - How do I tell if goats [are] happy?" See bolded quote above.


Actually that might be a paraphrase.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 17, 2016, 08:16:11 AM
And - Mike S - I wouldn't consider working for you ...  I don't even know who the hell you are. What a stupid comment.
I'm "Mike PSS".
AND I am probably the MOST personally connected to you of any TR poster.
I had lunch with you in Kansas City, we went to McCormick and Schmick's at the Plaza.  You went on and on about continued testing of Zircons.
I had a phone conference with you and R.H.Brown about Carbon 14.  During that call you found out that Mr. Brown was an OEC (old earth, young creation).  We also found out that Mr. Brown's conversion curve was mistaken as I had shown you previous in the mass balance sheets we developed together.

:pwned:

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 17, 2016, 08:33:56 AM
Dave has the memory of an oxygen deprived goldfish.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 17, 2016, 09:20:46 AM
Actually, Bluffy, you did ask "Um - How do I tell if goats [are] happy?" See bolded quote above.


Actually that might be a paraphrase.

Nope, direct quote other than I added the "are" to correct the grammar but did so transparently and obviously. See the quote from Bluffy. I bolded it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 17, 2016, 09:22:06 AM
Dave has the memory of an oxygen deprived goldfish.

I'm thinking more like an empty goldfish bowl. Oxygen deprived or otherwise.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 17, 2016, 10:09:32 AM
Jon is a liar.  Of course I have known what the "I" is in V=IR for probably at least 35 years.  That's basic electricity, not electronics though.  And if you want to continue to slander me about me supposedly "torturing my goats" why don't you at least come visit and see for yourself first before you continue your slander.  And - Mike S - I wouldn't consider working for you ...  I don't even know who the hell you are. What a stupid comment.
Haven't you actually met Mike?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 17, 2016, 12:43:41 PM
Fuck the goats and the rest of Bluffoonylvania, I wanna get back to the question of greening of deserts and what Bluffy makes of the links supplied that utterly devastate his beliefs about the Sahara and deserts in general.

So, Bluffy, what's up? Still think the deserts are spreading and drying up?


Har de fucking har har. What a bluffoon.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 17, 2016, 12:50:09 PM
Yeah, Dave seems to have badgered on that.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 17, 2016, 12:53:15 PM
 Yes I've met Mike now that I know this is Mike PSS .

 Yes I think deserts are far more extensive now than they were 4000 years ago ( 10,000 years ago under your belief system )
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 17, 2016, 12:54:56 PM
And nobody is disputing that.  In fact, it's a point many of us have made, repeatedly.

So what is YOUR point?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 17, 2016, 01:08:34 PM
your belief system

Knee-jerk IKYABWAI noted.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 17, 2016, 01:59:46 PM
  Yes I think deserts are far more extensive now than they were 4000 years ago ( 10,000 years ago under your belief system )
That's not what the title or OP of this thread is about. Perhaps you need reminding: "Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?"

It is not "Did deserts experience some expansion and/or contraction over the last 10,000 years?"

By the way, years are years. Period. Get used to it.

And nice try of sneaking in "far more extensive now than they were 4000 years ago". Do you have any evidence that desert area worldwide was far less extensive than it is now? Or that deserts were far greener 10,000 years ago than they are today? And, as asked previously, why 4000 years or 10,000 years. Nobody questions the fact deserts will and have experienced wet periods and dry periods, just like every other climate zone on the planet.

So, are you going to respond to the links posted indicating deserts are currently getting greener or have you badgered off?

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 17, 2016, 02:13:47 PM
Dave, I was wondering if you are more like me, mostly self-educated, or more like the others here who are mostly formally educated?
Dave thought that pushing the test button on a CO detector tested if it could detect CO.
Actually knowing him, he probably still thinks that.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 17, 2016, 04:28:46 PM
Dave, I was wondering if you are more like me, mostly self-educated, or more like the others here who are mostly formally educated?
Dave thought that pushing the test button on a CO detector tested if it could detect CO.
Actually knowing him, he probably still thinks that.

Bluffy doesn't think, he "knows" because he believes.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 17, 2016, 04:48:38 PM
I'm glad that I understand electricity and basic electronics and basic programming and such, ...
That is because the knowledge is useful, yes?


Quote
...but I do think that the knowledge could be gained in better ways now in this Internet Age.
That may be, I'm not sure which way is better. I am sure that knowledge, however one gets it, is better than beliefs, if one's concern is having some control of reality.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 17, 2016, 04:55:37 PM
I'm glad that I understand electricity and basic electronics and basic programming and such, ...
That is because the knowledge is useful, yes?


Quote
...but I do think that the knowledge could be gained in better ways now in this Internet Age.
That may be, I'm not sure which way is better. I am sure that knowledge, however one gets it, is better than beliefs, if one's concern is having some control of reality.
But believers are pretty sure their beliefs ARE knowledge.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 17, 2016, 05:07:03 PM
But believers are pretty sure their beliefs ARE knowledge.

Absolutley! I'm getting to that.  :)

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 17, 2016, 08:29:59 PM
 You guys seem to rely much more extensively on beliefs and faith than I do.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Doobie Keebler on June 17, 2016, 09:50:34 PM
You guys seem to rely much more extensively on beliefs and faith than I do.

(https://i.imgur.com/XCKha.gif)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Photon on June 17, 2016, 11:47:40 PM
The Audacity of Hope, I guess. You can feel Dave's desperately wishful thinking through the internets.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 18, 2016, 12:26:10 AM
You guys seem to rely much more extensively on beliefs and faith than I do.
And you just KNOW that, right?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 18, 2016, 12:34:12 AM
But how would you assess their happiness?  Or lack thereof?
Quote from: Dave a few days ago
My goats are the happiest, healthiest goats on EARTH!!!!111one!
Quote from: Dave now
Um- How do I tell if goats happy?
Priceless.


Uh oh Faid thinks he found some inconsistencies in Dave's ramblings. 
This is false of course, because Dave is never inconsistent. 

Clearly what has happened is that Faid has been afflicted with a severe case of DaveMustBeWrongismtm.
You guys can't even get the most simple things right. I didn't ask how *I* can tell if my goats are happy.  I obviously think I already know.  I asked how YOU would tell if they are happy.
So you were feigning ignorance to 'test' us, right?

Sure thing dave. I'll bite.

Tell us, oh wise Goatmaster, Queen Mother of Goats, He Who Has Owned Goats Before, Prime Tractor Mover, Lord-Provider of Hanging Branches (may Your machette always swing wildly):
What is the secret to determining whether goats are truly happy?

You have our eyes and ears.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 18, 2016, 12:39:33 AM
Yes I've met Mike now that I know this is Mike PSS .

 Yes I think deserts are far more extensive now than they were 4000 years ago ( 10,000 years ago under your belief system )
Actually I don't have a clue whether deserts are more extensive today than they were 10,000 years ago.

But I'm pretty sure they are more extensive today than they were  5,000 years ago.

You know, because of the greening trend of that time.

Your point?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 18, 2016, 03:52:52 AM
You guys seem to rely much more extensively on beliefs and faith than I do.
Will it come as a surprise to you to learn that pretty much every one of us sees the exact opposite?
Now: how would you go about determining where the truth lies?

:care:
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 18, 2016, 04:16:24 AM
And the only way to save agriculture is to create a new agriculture that enhances ecosystems instead of destroys them. 
Not necessarily.  Sometimes revolution is the answer. Sometimes incremental change is the answer.  On balance, I think incremental change has the edge. Which is why evolution is more powerful than intelligent design, and why even intelligent design, on the whole, works best when it proceeds incrementally.

Quote
I'm making excellent progress on that front. My goats appear to be the happiest, healthiest goats on the planet

You have no objective measure of this.  And it would seem to be belied by any number of nature documentaries of wild goats, and youtube videos of domestic goats who are given a stimulating environment to explore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58-atNakMWw


Quote
and I have cut out commercial feeds completely from their diet with no discernible change in milk production.  

Good.  I hope it continues to go well, and your rate of branch cutting proves sustainable.

Quote
My female rabbits have also transitioned to an entirely forage-based diet and the male rabbit will follow shortly.  

Well done.

Quote
My sustainable housing projects are also going well 
[citation needed]

Quote
as are my dealings with my local county. 
Did you respond to my question as to how you had described your human excrement handling facility?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 18, 2016, 04:17:57 AM
OK, so this is the desert thread.

Please respond to my post in whatever you've called your hobby farming thread.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 18, 2016, 04:24:11 AM
You guys seem to rely much more extensively on beliefs and faith than I do.
Well, there's something wrong with your perception then.

We, not you, are the ones whose conclusions are by definition, provisional, and who base them on actual evidence.

You, not we, are the one whose "scientists" include people who have to sign a "statement of faith" before they can state their conclusions.

We, not you, are the ones who actually read textbooks and papers.

You, not we, are the one who "hawkins" instead of "reads", which includes "skimming for nuggets" that appear to you to support your a priori conclusion and largely involves googling key words and using Ctrl-F on the search results.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 18, 2016, 05:31:53 AM
You guys seem to rely much more extensively on beliefs and faith than I do.
Dave, this seems much more defensive than a statement of fact.

Your statement is so factually false and ill timed that I can't tell what the word beliefs/faith even means to you.

Could you define beliefs/faith?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: SkepticTank on June 18, 2016, 05:51:55 AM
Hi RexT, you must be new.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 18, 2016, 06:27:10 AM
You guys seem to rely much more extensively on beliefs and faith than I do.
Dave, this seems much more defensive than a statement of fact.

Your statement is so factually false and ill timed that I can't tell what the word beliefs/faith even means to you.

Could you define beliefs/faith?
It means what he hasn't made up.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 18, 2016, 06:36:45 AM
Still waiting for Bluffy to get back to the topic of this thread, the one he started with.

Hey, Bluffy, what's your take on all those articles in the Google Hit List that say deserts worldwide are currently greening?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 18, 2016, 06:46:26 AM
You guys seem to rely much more extensively on beliefs and faith than I do.
Dave, this seems much more defensive than a statement of fact.

Your statement is so factually false and ill timed that I can't tell what the word beliefs/faith even means to you.
It's called bravado (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bravado). 
Quote
Could you define beliefs/faith?
Well, that's actually the very first of AFDave's laws of internet discourse:

Afdave's First Law: All evidences for evolution* are speculative. All speculations for creationism* are evidential.

* ... formulated back in the day when all his Alternative Reality Enthusiasm was focused on Creationism vs. Evolution. Since then it's apparent it applies to any and all Alternative Reality Kool-aid he imbibes, vis-a-vis Standard Science.


Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 18, 2016, 07:36:58 AM
You guys seem to rely much more extensively on beliefs and faith than I do.
Dave, this seems much more defensive than a statement of fact.

Your statement is so factually false and ill timed that I can't tell what the word beliefs/faith even means to you.

Could you define beliefs/faith?
I have to exercise a certain amount of "belief" or "faith" every time I drive my car.   The things I worry about most are things like ball joints disintegrating while flying down the highway at 70 mph.  That just happened to a friend of mine and he says that he was very lucky he didn't die.   Now I could inspect the ball joints on my own and provide myself with more  firsthand evidence that they are safe.  But I have chosen instead to place my "belief" or "faith" in my mechanic and trust him when he tells me that he has inspected them and they are fine.  My faith in my mechanic is not blind faith. I have reasons to believe that he is trustworthy and I won't go into those now but I'm sure you understand what I mean.

 With this background, let me tell you that I HATE exercising faith in anyone or anything.  I've been burned many times and this has taught me to be more careful in evaluating evidence and it has caused me to try to minimize the amount of faith that I have to exercise.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 18, 2016, 07:39:36 AM
 I know it seems crazy to you to hear me say that most mainstream life scientists exercise more faith than I do, but I've been interacting with them for 10 years and this is my conclusion from the evidence that I have seen.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 18, 2016, 07:41:17 AM
 So I think that most scientists working in the life-sciences are seriously deluded about some pretty fundamental things about the biosphere.  Michael Denton calls this "the priority of the paradigm."
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 18, 2016, 07:42:06 AM
You guys seem to rely much more extensively on beliefs and faith than I do.
Dave, this seems much more defensive than a statement of fact.

Your statement is so factually false and ill timed that I can't tell what the word beliefs/faith even means to you.

Could you define beliefs/faith?
I have to exercise a certain amount of "believe" or "faith" every time I drive my car.  The things I worry about most are things like ball joints disintegrating while flying down the highway at 70 mph.  That just happened to a friend of mine and he says that he was very lucky he didn't die.  Now I could inspect the ball joints on my own and provide myself with more  firsthand evidence that they are safe.  But I have chosen instead to place my "believe" or "faith" in my mechanic and trust him when he tells me that he has inspected them and they are fine.  My faith and my mechanic is not blind faith. I have reasons to believe that he is trustworthy and I won't go into those now but I'm sure you understand what I mean.

 With this background, let me tell you that I HATE exercising faith in anyone or anything.  I've been burned many times and this has taught me to be more careful in evaluating evidence and it has caused me to try to minimize the amount of faith that I have to exercise.


But you AREN'T "careful in evaluating evidence".  Instead, you decide what you want to believe and then search for "evidence" that think might support it, ignoring all evidence (often even the next sentence) that doesn't.

And you swallow whole, the  bullshit put out by AiG or WAPF, even when people point out (and you appear to concede) that much of what they post is crap, and even that some of what WAPF posts is not what you think it is.

We (or most of us anyway) don't "have faith" that our cars will work.  We weigh up probabilities, based on evidence, and assess risk.

A concept that seems to be so far beyond your understanding that you mistake it for the a priori dogma that your chosen religion demands of you.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 18, 2016, 07:42:20 AM
Well,  AFDave's first law is amazing. It stacks the deck in favor of one's desired outcome so well it entirely negates the possibility of rational objections. Dave must be very proud, or did he simply borrow the law from others? No, I recognize this in the form (heads I win tails you lose).
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 18, 2016, 07:42:38 AM
So I think that most scientists working in the life-sciences are seriously deluded about some pretty fundamental things about the biosphere.  Michael Denton calls this "the priority of the paradigm."
But you can never say what they are.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 18, 2016, 07:43:20 AM
I know it seems crazy to you to hear me say that most mainstream life scientists exercise more faith than I do, but I've been interacting with them for 10 years and this is my conclusion from the evidence that I have seen.
That is because you have no clue how to set about drawing a valid conclusion for evidence.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 18, 2016, 07:45:07 AM
... let me tell you that I HATE exercising faith in anyone or anything.  I've been burned many times and this has taught me to be more careful in evaluating evidence and it has caused me to try to minimize the amount of faith that I have to exercise.
This is what you tell yourself.
It is, however, not true.

You're a sucker for (i.e. "have faith in") AiG, CMI, ICR... all these "scientists" who have signed pledges to support a faith-based pre-conclusion. Same for the Weston Price club, Savory groupies, pyramidiots, and on and on and on.


Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 18, 2016, 07:48:17 AM
So I think that most scientists working in the life-sciences are seriously deluded about some pretty fundamental things about the biosphere.  Michael Denton calls this "the priority of the paradigm."
You have faith that Michael Denton's "paradigm" is correct.
You can not coherently articulate any "serious delu[sion] about some pretty fundamental things about the biosphere" hobbling "most scientists working in the life-sciences".
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 18, 2016, 07:51:15 AM
I know it seems crazy to you to hear me say that most mainstream life scientists exercise more faith than I do, but I've been interacting with them for 10 years and this is my conclusion from the evidence that I have seen.
No it's not.
You started out with that conclusion.
You explicitly stated it, over and over, at the OUTSET of this alleged 10 year journey.
I.e.  -  this is an obvious lie. Whether one told by you to us, or by evaD to you, it is an obvious lie, as anyone who cares to comb through the AtBC archives can confirm.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 18, 2016, 07:54:28 AM
Well,  AFDave's first law is amazing. It stacks the deck in favor of one's desired outcome so well it entirely negates the possibility of rational objections. Dave must be very proud, or did he simply borrow the law from others? No, I recognize this in the form (heads I win tails you lose).
The laws were formulated by people (I don't remember exactly who) from observing his online behavior over a long period of time.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 18, 2016, 08:14:26 AM
 We've been through every one of these points multiple times in the past. You all are simply doing what you do - ignoring evidence that you don't like.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 18, 2016, 08:14:43 AM
 And you are projecting this behavior on me.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 18, 2016, 08:26:47 AM
We've been through every one of these points multiple times in the past. You all are simply doing what you do - ignoring evidence that you don't like.
Quote
Afdave's Third Law: If you have an objection to any point I've raised, I've already addressed it. No, I won't tell you where.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 18, 2016, 08:27:08 AM
And you are projecting this behavior on me.
It's what you do.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 18, 2016, 09:11:59 AM
And you are projecting this behavior on me.
It's what you do.
It's true.
There really should be an AFDave Law that encapsulates his knee-jerk IKYABWAI (non)response to any criticism.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 18, 2016, 09:18:40 AM
He seems to be smart enough to know what "projecting" means, but not smart enough to consider the possiblity that it's what he is doing himself.

But then he'd have no way of figuring out which it is, because he has no objective means of evaluating competing hypotheses.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 18, 2016, 09:50:11 AM
He seems to be smart enough to know what "projecting" means, but not smart enough to consider the possiblity that it's what he is doing himself.

But then he'd have no way of figuring out which it is, because he has no objective means of evaluating competing hypotheses.

Nah, Bluffy knows exactly what it means and that it's a significant characteristic of his persona. Which is why, as Vox notes, he engages in IKYAWAI, usually as a defensive first strike. He believes if he says others are projecting before they say he is, then his claim wins by being first.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 18, 2016, 10:08:15 AM
You guys seem to rely much more extensively on beliefs and faith than I do.
It only seems that way to you.

Do the flood legends of the Wai Wai tribe support the Flood story of the Bible?

Why do two different methods give the same set of (wrong according to you) answers?
We do not say that both sets of answers MUST be time dependent. We say that both sets of answers being time dependent is the simplest answer.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 18, 2016, 10:10:27 AM
We've been through every one of these points multiple times in the past. You all are simply doing what you do - ignoring evidence that you don't like.

No Dave.
We do not ignore data we do not like.
When we say a team has won a game we are not ignoring the goals of the other team.
Not even when the score is 100 to 1.
We still acknowledge the 1.  BUT the 100 wins the game.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 18, 2016, 10:12:52 AM
I know it seems crazy to you to hear me say that most mainstream life scientists exercise more faith than I do, but I've been interacting with them for 10 years and this is my conclusion from the evidence that I have seen.

When did you conclude that?
What evidence did you have before you reached that conclusion?

Any conclusions you still have from childhood are based strictly on evidence you had as a child.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 18, 2016, 11:23:22 AM
Well,  AFDave's first law is amazing. It stacks the deck in favor of one's desired outcome so well it entirely negates the possibility of rational objections. Dave must be very proud, or did he simply borrow the law from others? No, I recognize this in the form (heads I win tails you lose).
You do realize that the laws are empirically derived from observation of Dave, and are not from Dave himself.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 18, 2016, 11:47:05 AM
We've been through every one of these points multiple times in the past. You all are simply doing what you do - ignoring evidence that you don't like.
You can't name a single piece of alleged "evidence" that you've proffered and we've ignored.

There's a reason for that.

Ignoring our responses does not make them disappear.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 18, 2016, 11:53:23 AM
Well,  AFDave's first law is amazing. It stacks the deck in favor of one's desired outcome so well it entirely negates the possibility of rational objections. Dave must be very proud, or did he simply borrow the law from others? No, I recognize this in the form (heads I win tails you lose).
You do realize that the laws are empirically derived from observation of Dave, and are not from Dave himself.
That is true but I think he follows those laws a lot more closely than people follow their own rules usually do.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 18, 2016, 11:54:52 AM
You do realize that the laws are empirically derived from observation of Dave, and are not from Dave himself.
Yes I do realize that.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 18, 2016, 12:06:40 PM
I have to exercise a certain amount of "belief" or "faith" every time I drive my car.   The things I worry about most are things like ball joints disintegrating while flying down the highway at 70 mph.  That just happened to a friend of mine and he says that he was very lucky he didn't die.   Now I could inspect the ball joints on my own and provide myself with more  firsthand evidence that they are safe.  But I have chosen instead to place my "belief" or "faith" in my mechanic and trust him when he tells me that he has inspected them and they are fine.  My faith in my mechanic is not blind faith. I have reasons to believe that he is trustworthy and I won't go into those now but I'm sure you understand what I mean.

 With this background, let me tell you that I HATE exercising faith in anyone or anything.  I've been burned many times and this has taught me to be more careful in evaluating evidence and it has caused me to try to minimize the amount of faith that I have to exercise.


If I take this as your answer to my question then I can see what you mean by faith. Yeah, faith in a known quantity like a good mechanic is reasonable by probably everyone here in this thread. That's is because as you say it is "not blind faith". Is this the kind of faith you meant when you said the scientists here rely more on faith than you?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 18, 2016, 12:50:10 PM
We've been through every one of these points multiple times in the past. You all are simply doing what you do - ignoring evidence that you don't like.
Dave, you are a collosal moron.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 18, 2016, 12:50:59 PM
And you are projecting this behavior on me.

Lololol. I can't believe this was the next post.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 18, 2016, 12:52:34 PM
He seems to be smart enough to know what "projecting" means, but not smart enough to consider the possiblity that it's what he is doing himself.

But then he'd have no way of figuring out which it is, because he has no objective means of evaluating competing hypotheses.

Nah, Bluffy knows exactly what it means and that it's a significant characteristic of his persona. Which is why, as Vox notes, he engages in IKYAWAI, usually as a defensive first strike. He believes if he says others are projecting before they say he is, then his claim wins by being first.
That's a novel application of priority.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 18, 2016, 01:24:00 PM
He seems to be smart enough to know what "projecting" means, but not smart enough to consider the possiblity that it's what he is doing himself.

But then he'd have no way of figuring out which it is, because he has no objective means of evaluating competing hypotheses.

Nah, Bluffy knows exactly what it means and that it's a significant characteristic of his persona. Which is why, as Vox notes, he engages in IKYAWAI, usually as a defensive first strike. He believes if he says others are projecting before they say he is, then his claim wins by being first.
That's a novel application of priority.
Bluffy exercises many novel applications.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 18, 2016, 07:33:15 PM
I have to exercise a certain amount of "belief" or "faith" every time I drive my car.   The things I worry about most are things like ball joints disintegrating while flying down the highway at 70 mph.  That just happened to a friend of mine and he says that he was very lucky he didn't die.   Now I could inspect the ball joints on my own and provide myself with more  firsthand evidence that they are safe.  But I have chosen instead to place my "belief" or "faith" in my mechanic and trust him when he tells me that he has inspected them and they are fine.  My faith in my mechanic is not blind faith. I have reasons to believe that he is trustworthy and I won't go into those now but I'm sure you understand what I mean.

 With this background, let me tell you that I HATE exercising faith in anyone or anything.  I've been burned many times and this has taught me to be more careful in evaluating evidence and it has caused me to try to minimize the amount of faith that I have to exercise.


If I take this as your answer to my question then I can see what you mean by faith. Yeah, faith in a known quantity like a good mechanic is reasonable by probably everyone here in this thread. That's is because as you say it is "not blind faith". Is this the kind of faith you meant when you said the scientists here rely more on faith than you?
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong, yet most scientists cling to it.  Blind faith.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 18, 2016, 08:07:12 PM
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong, yet most scientists cling to it.  Blind faith.
Maybe it's the way you worded this, but I'm having trouble following. Are you talking about abiogenesis or evolution?

I guess I'll wait for others to confirm what you say about their beliefs. But I doubt there is enough evidence to conclude that all life came from a single ancestor. It does seems at least possible.

Last I head no one knows precisely how life began. Some god may have started life for all we know, but there is no evidence for that, not that I am aware of, which isn't saying much since I'm not a scientist. As for random mutation + natural selection accounting for the diversity of life, it seems to do that quite well and backed up with a vast amount of evidence. I have no trouble believing it. So it is not blind faith to accept evolution as a fact but reasonable faith based on good evidence. I guess the difference being that blind faith is accepting something with either bad evidence or no evidence.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 18, 2016, 08:29:41 PM
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong
Complete bullshit.
Cite where Shapiro or anyone else has even claimed to have shown such a thing.

See?

You can't.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 18, 2016, 08:41:01 PM
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong, yet most scientists cling to it.  Blind faith.
Maybe it's the way you worded this, but I'm having trouble following. Are you talking about abiogenesis or evolution?

I guess I'll wait for others to confirm what you say about their beliefs. But I doubt there is enough evidence to conclude that all life came from a single ancestor. It does seems at least possible.
Hawkins is conflating two issues here - whether out of ignorance (probably) or intentionally trying to obfuscate.

(1) Common descent.
(2) The role of natural selection in evolution.

I know of no credible biologist who doubts (1), based on the myriad commonalities of all of life (shared genetics and the shared chirality of a whole slew of biological molecules, etc.) I've never seen  find any scientist - Shapiro or ANY serious scientist - making a case for independent origins of terrestrial life

And I know of no credible scientist who would say that (2) covers all the events that led from that single origin to all of life on earth today.

Hawkins, quite simply, has no idea what he's talking about. Worse: he keeps repeating this moronic sloganeering no matter how many times it's pointed out that it's dead wrong, and no matter how many times he's run away from  challenges to support it.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 18, 2016, 09:43:24 PM
I have to exercise a certain amount of "belief" or "faith" every time I drive my car.  The things I worry about most are things like ball joints disintegrating while flying down the highway at 70 mph.  That just happened to a friend of mine and he says that he was very lucky he didn't die.  Now I could inspect the ball joints on my own and provide myself with more  firsthand evidence that they are safe.  But I have chosen instead to place my "belief" or "faith" in my mechanic and trust him when he tells me that he has inspected them and they are fine.  My faith in my mechanic is not blind faith. I have reasons to believe that he is trustworthy and I won't go into those now but I'm sure you understand what I mean.

 With this background, let me tell you that I HATE exercising faith in anyone or anything.  I've been burned many times and this has taught me to be more careful in evaluating evidence and it has caused me to try to minimize the amount of faith that I have to exercise.


If I take this as your answer to my question then I can see what you mean by faith. Yeah, faith in a known quantity like a good mechanic is reasonable by probably everyone here in this thread. That's is because as you say it is "not blind faith". Is this the kind of faith you meant when you said the scientists here rely more on faith than you?
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong, yet most scientists cling to it.  Blind faith.
That would be a good example if it were true. But it isn't.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 19, 2016, 01:06:38 AM
I have to exercise a certain amount of "belief" or "faith" every time I drive my car.  The things I worry about most are things like ball joints disintegrating while flying down the highway at 70 mph.  That just happened to a friend of mine and he says that he was very lucky he didn't die.  Now I could inspect the ball joints on my own and provide myself with more  firsthand evidence that they are safe.  But I have chosen instead to place my "belief" or "faith" in my mechanic and trust him when he tells me that he has inspected them and they are fine.  My faith in my mechanic is not blind faith. I have reasons to believe that he is trustworthy and I won't go into those now but I'm sure you understand what I mean.

 With this background, let me tell you that I HATE exercising faith in anyone or anything.  I've been burned many times and this has taught me to be more careful in evaluating evidence and it has caused me to try to minimize the amount of faith that I have to exercise.


If I take this as your answer to my question then I can see what you mean by faith. Yeah, faith in a known quantity like a good mechanic is reasonable by probably everyone here in this thread. That's is because as you say it is "not blind faith". Is this the kind of faith you meant when you said the scientists here rely more on faith than you?
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong, yet most scientists cling to it.  Blind faith.
Please cite the "Third Wayer" source that has "shown this to be wrong".

And please specify what you mean by "this". 

None of the Third Wayers I am aware of have any problem with the hypothesis (not a belief - that isn't what scientists have) "that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor"


As for:

Quote
via random mutation + natural selection
you don't listen, do you?

ETA: oops, what VoxRat said.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 19, 2016, 01:10:06 AM
He also keeps using this expression "random mutation" as though it's some Darwinian shibboleth.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 19, 2016, 04:11:37 AM
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong, yet most scientists cling to it.  Blind faith.
Maybe it's the way you worded this, but I'm having trouble following. Are you talking about abiogenesis or evolution?

I guess I'll wait for others to confirm what you say about their beliefs. But I doubt there is enough evidence to conclude that all life came from a single ancestor. It does seems at least possible.

Last I head no one knows precisely how life began. Some god may have started life for all we know, but there is no evidence for that, not that I am aware of, which isn't saying much since I'm not a scientist. As for random mutation + natural selection accounting for the diversity of life, it seems to do that quite well and backed up with a vast amount of evidence. I have no trouble believing it. So it is not blind faith to accept evolution as a fact but reasonable faith based on good evidence. I guess the difference being that blind faith is accepting something with either bad evidence or no evidence.

Then you haven't read Shapiro ... or any of the Third Wayers.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 19, 2016, 04:14:05 AM
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong
Complete bullshit.
Cite where Shapiro or anyone else has even claimed to have shown such a thing.

See?

You can't.
Shapiro wrote
Quote
Localized random mutation, selection operating "one gene at a time" (John Maynard Smith's formulation), and gradual modification of individual functions are unable to provide satisfactory explanations for the molecular data, no matter how much time for change is assumed. There are simply too many potential degrees of freedom for random variability and too many interconnections to account for.
...
It has been a surprise to learn how thoroughly cells protect themselves against precisely the kinds of accidental genetic change that, according to conventional theory, are the sources of evolutionary variability.
...
The point of this discussion is that our current knowledge of genetic change is fundamentally at variance with neo-Darwinist postulates. http://truthmatters.info/shapiro-buries-naturalism/
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 19, 2016, 04:26:36 AM
Um, good thing that isn't what you argued. Else everyone would be wrong. As it is, it's just you who has gotten the wrong end of the stupid stick.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 19, 2016, 04:41:12 AM
Then you haven't read Shapiro ... or any of the Third Wayers.
You are right. And I don't know the exact method(s) that evolution occurs either. So what? There is plenty evidence for evolution and that is not a matter of faith.

You claimed that scientists have more faith than you. I still don't know what your point is..

(1) rational faith
(2) irrational faith (blind faith)

So far you seem to be saying that scientists have (1) rational faith (trusting good evidence), and this kind of faith you have too (trusting a good mechanic).

Why do you complain about scientists having the same kind of rational faith you have?I don't get it.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 19, 2016, 04:44:10 AM
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong
Complete bullshit.
Cite where Shapiro or anyone else has even claimed to have shown such a thing.

See?

You can't.
Shapiro wrote
Quote
Localized random mutation, selection operating "one gene at a time" (John Maynard Smith's formulation), and gradual modification of individual functions are unable to provide satisfactory explanations for the molecular data, no matter how much time for change is assumed. There are simply too many potential degrees of freedom for random variability and too many interconnections to account for.
...
It has been a surprise to learn how thoroughly cells protect themselves against precisely the kinds of accidental genetic change that, according to conventional theory, are the sources of evolutionary variability.
...
The point of this discussion is that our current knowledge of genetic change is fundamentally at variance with neo-Darwinist postulates. http://truthmatters.info/shapiro-buries-naturalism/
And how many "life scientists" today do you think are wedded to those alleged "neo-Darwinian postulates"?  Or, for that matter, how many life scientists were ever wedded to them?

You do know that "postulate" is another word for "hypthesis", don't you? And that science proceeds by attempting to falsify hypotheses?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 19, 2016, 04:49:52 AM
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong, yet most scientists cling to it.  Blind faith.
Maybe it's the way you worded this, but I'm having trouble following. Are you talking about abiogenesis or evolution?

I guess I'll wait for others to confirm what you say about their beliefs. But I doubt there is enough evidence to conclude that all life came from a single ancestor. It does seems at least possible.

Last I head no one knows precisely how life began. Some god may have started life for all we know, but there is no evidence for that, not that I am aware of, which isn't saying much since I'm not a scientist. As for random mutation + natural selection accounting for the diversity of life, it seems to do that quite well and backed up with a vast amount of evidence. I have no trouble believing it. So it is not blind faith to accept evolution as a fact but reasonable faith based on good evidence. I guess the difference being that blind faith is accepting something with either bad evidence or no evidence.

Then you haven't read Shapiro ... or any of the Third Wayers.
Dave, you are the one who has not read Shapiro, and while you might have Ctrl-F'd Shapiro, you certainly haven't Ctrl-F'd any of the others.  I, on the other hand, have read a great deal of Shapiro, and I have not only read Denis Noble's book and other writings, but, as you know, got an unsolicited email from Denis Noble commending my response to some IDiot who was trying to co-opt the Third Way for ID.  He's a charming man.

You, on the other hand, are an ignorant blowhard.  In other words you know virtually nothing about the "Third Way", what you've read, you misunderstand, and you blithely dismiss the very basis of their approach as "hilariously out to lunch".

Profoundly dishonest.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 19, 2016, 04:53:18 AM
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong, yet most scientists cling to it.  Blind faith.
Maybe it's the way you worded this, but I'm having trouble following. Are you talking about abiogenesis or evolution?

I guess I'll wait for others to confirm what you say about their beliefs. But I doubt there is enough evidence to conclude that all life came from a single ancestor. It does seems at least possible.

Last I head no one knows precisely how life began. Some god may have started life for all we know, but there is no evidence for that, not that I am aware of, which isn't saying much since I'm not a scientist. As for random mutation + natural selection accounting for the diversity of life, it seems to do that quite well and backed up with a vast amount of evidence. I have no trouble believing it. So it is not blind faith to accept evolution as a fact but reasonable faith based on good evidence. I guess the difference being that blind faith is accepting something with either bad evidence or no evidence.

Then you haven't read Shapiro ... or any of the Third Wayers.

Then quote them, with context and links. Pretty simple to do. No reason why you couldn't, unless, of course, those quotes don't exist.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 19, 2016, 04:55:32 AM
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong
Complete bullshit.
Cite where Shapiro or anyone else has even claimed to have shown such a thing.

See?

You can't.
Shapiro wrote
Quote
Localized random mutation, selection operating "one gene at a time" (John Maynard Smith's formulation), and gradual modification of individual functions are unable to provide satisfactory explanations for the molecular data, no matter how much time for change is assumed. There are simply too many potential degrees of freedom for random variability and too many interconnections to account for.
...
It has been a surprise to learn how thoroughly cells protect themselves against precisely the kinds of accidental genetic change that, according to conventional theory, are the sources of evolutionary variability.
...
The point of this discussion is that our current knowledge of genetic change is fundamentally at variance with neo-Darwinist postulates. http://truthmatters.info/shapiro-buries-naturalism/
Quoting your own selection of quotes from your silly blog is not what was asked for. Quotes directly from the author's own work with context and a link is what was asked for.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 19, 2016, 05:26:09 AM

Profoundly dishonest.
Now Lizzie, you only say this because you are a silly women with too much faith in your science religion. For the love of god, country and composting shat-buckets!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 19, 2016, 06:14:10 AM
Then you haven't read Shapiro ... or any of the Third Wayers.
You are right. And I don't know the exact method(s) that evolution occurs either. So what? There is plenty evidence for evolution and that is not a matter of faith.

You claimed that scientists have more faith than you. I still don't know what your point is..

(1) rational faith
(2) irrational faith (blind faith)

So far you seem to be saying that scientists have (1) rational faith (trusting good evidence), and this kind of faith you have too (trusting a good mechanic).

Why do you complain about scientists having the same kind of rational faith you have?I don't get it.


Of course there is evidence for evolution. All species are programmed to adapt to their various environments.  What is unwarranted is to make a flying leaps such as "humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor."  Statements like that require a lot of faith because the evidence is very tenuous.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 19, 2016, 06:34:39 AM
Then you haven't read Shapiro ... or any of the Third Wayers.
You are right. And I don't know the exact method(s) that evolution occurs either. So what? There is plenty evidence for evolution and that is not a matter of faith.

You claimed that scientists have more faith than you. I still don't know what your point is..

(1) rational faith
(2) irrational faith (blind faith)

So far you seem to be saying that scientists have (1) rational faith (trusting good evidence), and this kind of faith you have too (trusting a good mechanic).

Why do you complain about scientists having the same kind of rational faith you have?I don't get it.



Of course there is evidence for evolution. All species are programmed to adapt to their various environments. 

Species don't need to be "programmed to adapt".  Natural selection IS the "program" by which species adapt to their environment.


Quote
What is unwarranted is to make a flying leaps such as "humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor."  Statements like that require a lot of faith because the evidence is very tenuous.
The issue of common ancestry is a completely different issue.  And the evidence for common ancestry is even stronger than the evidence for the role played by natural selection.  While there's plenty of evidence that natural selection plays a role in evolutionary change, there are clearly other factors at work, the most important being drift, and there may be others we have not yet discovered.

But the common ancestry of all currently living things (and of all known fossils) is supported by just about every aspect of biology and palaeontology.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 19, 2016, 06:38:03 AM
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong
Complete bullshit.
Cite where Shapiro or anyone else has even claimed to have shown such a thing.

See?

You can't.
Shapiro wrote
Quote
Localized random mutation, selection operating "one gene at a time" (John Maynard Smith's formulation), and gradual modification of individual functions are unable to provide satisfactory explanations for the molecular data, no matter how much time for change is assumed. There are simply too many potential degrees of freedom for random variability and too many interconnections to account for.
...
It has been a surprise to learn how thoroughly cells protect themselves against precisely the kinds of accidental genetic change that, according to conventional theory, are the sources of evolutionary variability.
...
The point of this discussion is that our current knowledge of genetic change is fundamentally at variance with neo-Darwinist postulates. http://truthmatters.info/shapiro-buries-naturalism/
Exactly.
Q. E. f. D.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 19, 2016, 06:45:26 AM
  What is unwarranted is to make a flying leaps such as "humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor."  Statements like that require a lot of faith because the evidence is very tenuous.
The bluster and bravado never ends.

No, the evidence is overwhelming, as anyone even noddingly familiar with the subject knows. Just for example (http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/permanent-exhibitions/human-origins-and-cultural-halls/anne-and-bernard-spitzer-hall-of-human-origins/understanding-our-past/dna-comparing-humans-and-chimps/).

Your content-free sloganeering on the subject is transparently whistling-past-the-graveyard, self-consoling bravado.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 19, 2016, 07:23:36 AM
]Of course there is evidence for evolution. All species are programmed to adapt to their various environments. 
I'm happy you agree there is evidence for evolution. Although, so far, I wonder if we agree on what that evidence is, or agree on what evolution is.

You and I both just witnessed scientists here admitting that the theory of evolution isn't complete. Some gaps in the knowledge of how evolution works remain. And you and I both have witnessed scientists here saying their belief in evolution is (1) rational faith (based on good evidence). And nowhere in this thread have we witnessed any scientist engaged in (2) blind faith.

Quote
What is unwarranted is to make a flying leaps such as "humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor."  Statements like that require a lot of faith because the evidence is very tenuous.
Ah, I see you have set up a kind of balance scale where on one side there is evidence and on the other faith. You think when the evidence side is lacking more faith is needed on the other side to balance the scale. This presumes that scientists a-priori believe things regardless of the evidence. Why would you presume this patently false notion unless you yourself are prone to a-priori beliefs and projecting that onto others?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 19, 2016, 10:43:52 AM
That would be the reason.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 19, 2016, 02:41:49 PM
Still pissing about everything other than deserts greening.

Wonder if we'll ever get back to that and if then, Bluffy will opine on the multitude of articles posted that invalidate his notion that desertification is proceeding pell-mell. And if he'll admit he is wrong on this issue.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 19, 2016, 03:02:41 PM
Lol.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 19, 2016, 06:18:47 PM
]Of course there is evidence for evolution. All species are programmed to adapt to their various environments. 
I'm happy you agree there is evidence for evolution. Although, so far, I wonder if we agree on what that evidence is, or agree on what evolution is.

You and I both just witnessed scientists here admitting that the theory of evolution isn't complete. Some gaps in the knowledge of how evolution works remain. And you and I both have witnessed scientists here saying their belief in evolution is (1) rational faith (based on good evidence). And nowhere in this thread have we witnessed any scientist engaged in (2) blind faith.

Quote
What is unwarranted is to make a flying leaps such as "humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor."  Statements like that require a lot of faith because the evidence is very tenuous.
Ah, I see you have set up a kind of balance scale where on one side there is evidence and on the other faith. You think when the evidence side is lacking more faith is needed on the other side to balance the scale. This presumes that scientists a-priori believe things regardless of the evidence. Why would you presume this patently false notion unless you yourself are prone to a-priori beliefs and projecting that onto others?

I don't "presume" that notion.  I observe it.  Here.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 19, 2016, 06:44:26 PM
]Of course there is evidence for evolution. All species are programmed to adapt to their various environments. 
I'm happy you agree there is evidence for evolution. Although, so far, I wonder if we agree on what that evidence is, or agree on what evolution is.

You and I both just witnessed scientists here admitting that the theory of evolution isn't complete. Some gaps in the knowledge of how evolution works remain. And you and I both have witnessed scientists here saying their belief in evolution is (1) rational faith (based on good evidence). And nowhere in this thread have we witnessed any scientist engaged in (2) blind faith.

Quote
What is unwarranted is to make a flying leaps such as "humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor."  Statements like that require a lot of faith because the evidence is very tenuous.
Ah, I see you have set up a kind of balance scale where on one side there is evidence and on the other faith. You think when the evidence side is lacking more faith is needed on the other side to balance the scale. This presumes that scientists a-priori believe things regardless of the evidence. Why would you presume this patently false notion unless you yourself are prone to a-priori beliefs and projecting that onto others?

I don't "presume" that notion.  I observe it.  Here.
But of course you can't name a single example.
Keep on lying to yourself, Hawkins.
At this point, you've got so many years invested in it, you can hardly do a 180˚.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 19, 2016, 07:10:17 PM
I don't "presume" that notion.  I observe it.  Here.
I wonder why I haven't observed it here. Would you point me to an example?


Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 19, 2016, 07:22:28 PM
Is this quote an example of scientists believing something a-priori?

Quote
What is unwarranted is to make a flying leaps such as "humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor."  Statements like that require a lot of faith because the evidence is very tenuous.
There are two possible ways to explain how humans and chimps are very similar. If there is another I don't know. (1) God created both (2) common ancestor

Which one is more likely? Which one has more evidence? Which one do you believe?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 19, 2016, 07:27:43 PM
I have to exercise a certain amount of "belief" or "faith" every time I drive my car.  The things I worry about most are things like ball joints disintegrating while flying down the highway at 70 mph.  That just happened to a friend of mine and he says that he was very lucky he didn't die.  Now I could inspect the ball joints on my own and provide myself with more  firsthand evidence that they are safe.  But I have chosen instead to place my "belief" or "faith" in my mechanic and trust him when he tells me that he has inspected them and they are fine.  My faith in my mechanic is not blind faith. I have reasons to believe that he is trustworthy and I won't go into those now but I'm sure you understand what I mean.

 With this background, let me tell you that I HATE exercising faith in anyone or anything.  I've been burned many times and this has taught me to be more careful in evaluating evidence and it has caused me to try to minimize the amount of faith that I have to exercise.


If I take this as your answer to my question then I can see what you mean by faith. Yeah, faith in a known quantity like a good mechanic is reasonable by probably everyone here in this thread. That's is because as you say it is "not blind faith". Is this the kind of faith you meant when you said the scientists here rely more on faith than you?
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong, yet most scientists cling to it.  Blind faith.

There is lots of evidence.
You do not consider it in your evaluations.
Don't forget Darwin was trained in the clergy.
He started with Creationism and changed AFTER seeing evidence to the contrary.
And did you forget you believe that random mutation occurs.
And that not every living creature reproduces.


Of course you drop the discussion before ever explaining what prevents beneficial mutations from occurring.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 19, 2016, 07:30:09 PM
A great example of "blind faith" exercised by scientists is their belief that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor via random mutation + natural selection.  James Shapiro and the "Third Wayers" have shown this to be wrong
Complete bullshit.
Cite where Shapiro or anyone else has even claimed to have shown such a thing.

See?

You can't.
Shapiro wrote
Quote
Localized random mutation, selection operating "one gene at a time" (John Maynard Smith's formulation), and gradual modification of individual functions are unable to provide satisfactory explanations for the molecular data, no matter how much time for change is assumed. There are simply too many potential degrees of freedom for random variability and too many interconnections to account for.
...
It has been a surprise to learn how thoroughly cells protect themselves against precisely the kinds of accidental genetic change that, according to conventional theory, are the sources of evolutionary variability.
...
The point of this discussion is that our current knowledge of genetic change is fundamentally at variance with neo-Darwinist postulates. http://truthmatters.info/shapiro-buries-naturalism/

None of that contradicts the real theory of evolution.
You only think it does because you do not understand it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 19, 2016, 07:32:38 PM
Then you haven't read Shapiro ... or any of the Third Wayers.
You are right. And I don't know the exact method(s) that evolution occurs either. So what? There is plenty evidence for evolution and that is not a matter of faith.

You claimed that scientists have more faith than you. I still don't know what your point is..

(1) rational faith
(2) irrational faith (blind faith)

So far you seem to be saying that scientists have (1) rational faith (trusting good evidence), and this kind of faith you have too (trusting a good mechanic).

Why do you complain about scientists having the same kind of rational faith you have?I don't get it.


Of course there is evidence for evolution. All species are programmed to adapt to their various environments.  What is unwarranted is to make a flying leaps such as "humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor."  Statements like that require a lot of faith because the evidence is very tenuous.

No it isn't.
But more importantly there is not evidence of an alternative.
You have to start with any alternative but do not need to start with humans and chimps sharing a common ancestor to reach that conclusion.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 19, 2016, 07:56:40 PM
Is Dave anything like Wendy Wright?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 19, 2016, 08:08:35 PM
Is Dave anything like Wendy Wright?
Oh yeah.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 19, 2016, 08:15:22 PM
Is Dave anything like Wendy Wright?
Oh yeah.
I couldn't watch the whole interview Dawkins did with her. It wasn't just her astounding ignorance but that combined with her astounding arrogance was more than I could take.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 19, 2016, 08:49:57 PM
Possibly what you're trying to put your finger on - what both WW & DH exemplify so thoroughly - is militant ignorance.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 19, 2016, 09:26:33 PM
Possibly what you're trying to put your finger on - what both WW & DH exemplify so thoroughly - is militant ignorance.
Possibly yes. You're right that I can't quite put my finger on the problem. I sense it's something I'm not qualified to understand. Such people are nevertheless fascinating from a certain point of view. Maybe Lizzie knows how a brain can possess at birth, acquire or develop the Morton's Demon condition. Is there a medication or incantation that would give them some relief?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 19, 2016, 10:18:53 PM
Rex, my eyes were truly opened to the impossibility of Dave seeing past his demons in a debate we had at Dawkins old site. It was so amazing to me that I archived it at http://bwe1.wordpress.com
It is illuminating as to the lengths he will go to not understand.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 19, 2016, 11:44:29 PM
Possibly what you're trying to put your finger on - what both WW & DH exemplify so thoroughly - is militant ignorance.
Possibly yes. You're right that I can't quite put my finger on the problem. I sense it's something I'm not qualified to understand. Such people are nevertheless fascinating from a certain point of view. Maybe Lizzie knows how a brain can possess at birth, acquire or develop the Morton's Demon condition. Is there a medication or incantation that would give them some relief?

The brain doesn't possess the condition, the brain is just part of the system.  Plenty of people who think how Dave thinks wake up one day and think - hey, maybe this DOESN'T make sense - maybe I need to rethink this.

I'd say the biggest issue is incentive.  If you are trapped by a circular system in which the only way out is via embarassment, it's much harder than if there are emotional rewards attached to leaving.  So the more you publicise your position (write blog posts about it, boast about being a "science geek", and about how "brilliant" you are) and generally meld your public and private persona with your stand on these things, the harder it becomes to change.

That's the reality of the demon. 

As a friend of mine once said, embarassment is the most powerful emotion in the world.  It might be useful for maintaining socially acceptable norms and thus rule-adherence, but it has a pretty terrible downside.  Some people have argued that it lies at the bottom of warfare.  I think that might be true, although in that context it's usually called "shame".  The inverse of the collective version is "patriotism".

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 19, 2016, 11:51:05 PM
It's funny how Dave is all about the details when it suits him, and all about dismissing them when it doesn't
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 03:07:45 AM
geez, I just googled Wendy Wright.

Dawkins shouldn't be allowed out.  He has no clue.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 20, 2016, 03:41:56 AM
Quote
This presumes that scientists a-priori believe things regardless of the evidence. Why would you presume this patently false notion unless you yourself are prone to a-priori beliefs and projecting that onto others?
Age of the earth is one example.  The evidence for a young earth far outweighs the "evidence" for an old earth and has been presented many times to these people.  In fact the only "evidence" for an old earth requires unwarranted assumptions. 
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 20, 2016, 03:44:12 AM
Is this quote an example of scientists believing something a-priori?

Quote
What is unwarranted is to make a flying leaps such as "humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor."  Statements like that require a lot of faith because the evidence is very tenuous.
There are two possible ways to explain how humans and chimps are very similar. If there is another I don't know. (1) God created both (2) common ancestor

Which one is more likely? Which one has more evidence? Which one do you believe?
Well I'm glad you acknowledge that the evidence fits both theories.  I favor (1) because it's more consistent with ALL the evidence we have, not just some of it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 20, 2016, 04:27:00 AM
Quote
This presumes that scientists a-priori believe things regardless of the evidence. Why would you presume this patently false notion unless you yourself are prone to a-priori beliefs and projecting that onto others?
Age of the earth is one example.  The evidence for a young earth far outweighs the "evidence" for an old earth and has been presented many times to these people.  In fact the only "evidence" for an old earth requires unwarranted assumptions. 
Complete Bullshit, of course.
Lies that Hawkins has formulated into these content-free slogans, he can recite to himself in his sleep, encapsulating :


Afdave's First Law: All evidences for evolution are speculative. All speculations for creationism are evidential.

Sort of implicitly:
Afdave's Second Law: One may escape intellectual responsibility on any issue merely by stating an intent to pursue it.
... if the slogan is supposed to convey any intent to deliver any content supporting it.

Afdave's Third Law: If you have an objection to any point I've raised, I've already addressed it. No, I won't tell you where.

Afdave's Sixth Law: Any claim AFDave posts on a new discussion board invalidates the refutations of the same claim he has already seen and acknowledged on previous discussion boards.

Afdave's Seventh Law: No matter how transparently pathetic or retarded any of Dave's claims may be they can always be followed by something even more pathetic and retarded.

AFDave's Eighth Law: Any thread where I'm getting my ass handed to me on the original topic can be prolonged indefinitely by the introduction of tangential diversions or an abnormal focus on meaningless minutiae.[/b]
(notice how we're not talking about deserts any more?)

... possibly a few others, or others that should be AFDave laws - like the knee-jerk IKYABWAI-ism
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 20, 2016, 04:34:48 AM
Is this quote an example of scientists believing something a-priori?

Quote
What is unwarranted is to make a flying leaps such as "humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor."  Statements like that require a lot of faith because the evidence is very tenuous.
There are two possible ways to explain how humans and chimps are very similar. If there is another I don't know. (1) God created both (2) common ancestor

Which one is more likely? Which one has more evidence? Which one do you believe?
Well I'm glad you acknowledge that the evidence fits both theories.  I favor (1) because it's more consistent with ALL the evidence we have, not just some of it.
Of course! Any set of facts "fits" the theory "A magic being poofed it into being by unknowable magic means of which not a single detail is known, or knowable!" better than "it came about by a complex series of events, the full totality of which can never be known down to the last detail".

But (a) nothing can actually constitute "evidence" for (1), since nothing could ever NOT be evidence for it.
And (b) there's certainly nothing that says (1) is more "likely" than (2).
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 04:56:31 AM
Rex, my eyes were truly opened to the impossibility of Dave seeing past his demons in a debate we had at Dawkins old site. It was so amazing to me that I archived it at http://bwe1.wordpress.com
It is illuminating as to the lengths he will go to not understand.
My first clue upon returning to TR  was realizing that no change had occurred during 8 yrs of exposure to the rational thinking of some pretty smart people. How is that even possible?

I'm reminded of the paradox when the unstoppable force meets the immovable object. Gridlock. Reason never lets up and Stubborn never lets go.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 20, 2016, 05:10:11 AM
Quote
This presumes that scientists a-priori believe things regardless of the evidence. Why would you presume this patently false notion unless you yourself are prone to a-priori beliefs and projecting that onto others?
Age of the earth is one example.  The evidence for a young earth far outweighs the "evidence" for an old earth and has been presented many times to these people.  In fact the only "evidence" for an old earth requires unwarranted assumptions. 

Oh, you mean like the varves at Lake Kalksjon? The ones you can't even begin to explain away except by using extraordinarily bizarre notions that don't make any sense whatsoever? Like how some sort of massive coordinated global storm/seismic event resulted in the atmospheric 14C varying in a pattern that correlates extremely well with subsequent massive global storms that cause fairly regular alternating layers of silts that just happen to appear to be annual and, indeed, are essentially identical to the upper 1/3 of them which you accept as being varves because, you know, when you drop a pebble into a pond the ripples get smaller and smaller. That sort of evidence?

Face it, Bluffy, all you have is "billions of dead things buried in the ground", for which there is more than adequate explanation.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 05:11:57 AM

The brain doesn't possess the condition, the brain is just part of the system.  Plenty of people who think how Dave thinks wake up one day and think - hey, maybe this DOESN'T make sense - maybe I need to rethink this.

I'd say the biggest issue is incentive.  If you are trapped by a circular system in which the only way out is via embarassment, it's much harder than if there are emotional rewards attached to leaving.  So the more you publicise your position (write blog posts about it, boast about being a "science geek", and about how "brilliant" you are) and generally meld your public and private persona with your stand on these things, the harder it becomes to change.

That's the reality of the demon. 

As a friend of mine once said, embarassment is the most powerful emotion in the world.  It might be useful for maintaining socially acceptable norms and thus rule-adherence, but it has a pretty terrible downside.  Some people have argued that it lies at the bottom of warfare.  I think that might be true, although in that context it's usually called "shame".  The inverse of the collective version is "patriotism".


Thanks, Lizzie. That all makes sense. Only I can't see that embarrassment is the root cause of warfare since there are other obvious causes; fear of other, greed, need for new resources, religion, etc.

So if I understand you are saying that the demon is a systemic phenomenon? Not just something that happens in a particular person's brain because of how that person is built?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 05:14:44 AM
Quote
This presumes that scientists a-priori believe things regardless of the evidence. Why would you presume this patently false notion unless you yourself are prone to a-priori beliefs and projecting that onto others?
Age of the earth is one example.  The evidence for a young earth far outweighs the "evidence" for an old earth

No, it doesn't.  There is no evidence for a young earth that is not perfectly consistent with an old earth, and plenty of evidence for an old earth that is totally inconsistent with a young earth.  More to the point, there are vast amounts of consilient evidence that points to the fairly precise age of 4.5-4.6 billion years for the earth, and 13.8 billion years for the universe.

Quote
and has been presented many times to these people. 

You mean "billions of dead things" and "lotsa flood legends"?

:unsure:

Quote
in fact the only "evidence" for an old earth requires unwarranted assumptions. 

Did you forget you were unable to produce a single one?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 20, 2016, 05:16:17 AM
Rex, my eyes were truly opened to the impossibility of Dave seeing past his demons in a debate we had at Dawkins old site. It was so amazing to me that I archived it at http://bwe1.wordpress.com
It is illuminating as to the lengths he will go to not understand.
My first clue upon returning to TR  was realizing that no change had occurred during 8 yrs of exposure to the rational thinking of some pretty smart people. How is that even possible?

I'm reminded of the paradox when the unstoppable force meets the immovable object. Gridlock. Reason never lets up and Stubborn never lets go.

RexT, I think you must not understand the reason for engaging with Bluffy, it's certainly not to convince him he is and has been publicly wrong for well over a decade, no, not that, but rather it's to see how far down the rabbit hole one can encourage him to go. To see where if he can be goaded into going where no man has gone before. To see just how silly he can get.

It's a sport, an art, a science, a skill and an amusing pasttime.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 05:18:01 AM

The brain doesn't possess the condition, the brain is just part of the system.  Plenty of people who think how Dave thinks wake up one day and think - hey, maybe this DOESN'T make sense - maybe I need to rethink this.

I'd say the biggest issue is incentive.  If you are trapped by a circular system in which the only way out is via embarassment, it's much harder than if there are emotional rewards attached to leaving.  So the more you publicise your position (write blog posts about it, boast about being a "science geek", and about how "brilliant" you are) and generally meld your public and private persona with your stand on these things, the harder it becomes to change.

That's the reality of the demon. 

As a friend of mine once said, embarassment is the most powerful emotion in the world.  It might be useful for maintaining socially acceptable norms and thus rule-adherence, but it has a pretty terrible downside.  Some people have argued that it lies at the bottom of warfare.  I think that might be true, although in that context it's usually called "shame".  The inverse of the collective version is "patriotism".


Thanks, Lizzie. That all makes sense. Only I can't see that embarrassment is the root cause of warfare since there are other obvious causes; fear of other, greed, need for new resources, religion, etc.
Well, I wouldn't say it was the sole cause.  But I do think honour and vengeance for dishonour is a pretty powerful strand.  People become most aggressive when they feel belittled, in my view, either as an individual or as the group with which they identify, in my experience.

Quote
So if I understand you are saying that the demon is a systemic phenomenon? Not just something that happens in a particular person's brain because of how that person is built?


Yes :)  And therefore potentially changeable.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 20, 2016, 05:19:50 AM
I don't "presume" that notion.  I observe it.  Here.
I wonder why I haven't observed it here. Would you point me to an example?
Afdave's Third Law: If you have an objection to any point I've raised, I've already addressed it. No, I won't tell you where.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 20, 2016, 05:21:06 AM
The problem is Bluffy is getting jaded. Or lazy. Or perhaps we've come to the end of the lode, we've mined Bluffy for all he's worth. He just spouts the same old, same old, again and again. "Scientists are ignoring the evidence", "Billions of dead things", "Flood legends". He's getting boring.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 20, 2016, 05:27:33 AM
Quote
This presumes that scientists a-priori believe things regardless of the evidence. Why would you presume this patently false notion unless you yourself are prone to a-priori beliefs and projecting that onto others?
Age of the earth is one example.  The evidence for a young earth far outweighs the "evidence" for an old earth

No, it doesn't.  There is no evidence for a young earth that is not perfectly consistent with an old earth, and plenty of evidence for an old earth that is totally inconsistent with a young earth.  More to the point, there are vast amounts of consilient evidence that points to the fairly precise age of 4.5-4.6 billion years for the earth, and 13.8 billion years for the universe.

Quote
and has been presented many times to these people. 

You mean "billions of dead things" and "lotsa flood legends"?

:unsure:

Quote
in fact the only "evidence" for an old earth requires unwarranted assumptions. 

Did you forget you were unable to produce a single one?

At the prior TR we had a thread on assumptions in radiometric dating.  Dave led it off with the standard YEC canards:


Of course those were demolished in short order and Dave went into "You assume that God didn't do it { to lie to us on a brobdingnagian scale - Jonf}" mode.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 05:42:09 AM
And we don't even assume that.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 05:45:50 AM
Quote
This presumes that scientists a-priori believe things regardless of the evidence. Why would you presume this patently false notion unless you yourself are prone to a-priori beliefs and projecting that onto others?
Age of the earth is one example.  The evidence for a young earth far outweighs the "evidence" for an old earth and has been presented many times to these people.  In fact the only "evidence" for an old earth requires unwarranted assumptions. 
So you are saying that scientists a-priori believed the earth was old before there was evidence to support that belief? If so, I reject that claim because that is NOT science. Scientists are ordinary people doing extraordinary work using science. It isn't the people doing science you are up against but the science itself, which begins with a-priori assumptions, (assumptions, not beliefs) and then sets out to TEST those assumptions. When a scientist is presented with evidence that falsifies some assumption they note the failure and then continue the process until, if fortune permits, an assumption is found that withstands every attempt to falsify it.

On the other hand, religion begins with the a-priori belief (belief, not assumption) in god. Dave, do you merely assume god or do you take it a step further and actually believe?

Dave, I was raised to believe in god. My parents took us to church where we heard the "word of god" preached. It was never supported by the first bit of evidence, just presented as a-priori fact. It wasn't until I became an adult when I began searching for evidence that god existed and (embarrassingly) not until I was in my late 40s when I joined IIDB and later TR I finally gave up looking for evidence for god. I gave up, Dave, because there is NO evidence for god.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 20, 2016, 05:51:21 AM
Hey Rex, good luck man. You appear to be blinkered like the rest but at least you're a bit polite so kudos for that.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 20, 2016, 05:53:13 AM
My last best hope for you would be to suggest reading Josh McDowell ... "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" ... Again, good luck to you!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 20, 2016, 05:56:05 AM
My last best hope for you would be to suggest reading Josh McDowell ... "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" ... Josh was like you ... seeking evidence for God ... in fact, trying to disprove God. Again, good luck to you!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 05:56:21 AM
How about you read The Age of the Earth by G. Brent Dalrymple (https://www.amazon.com/Age-Earth-G-Brent-Dalrymple/dp/0804723311), Dave?

Then at least you won't embarass yourself by not even knowing what the evidence IS.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 06:03:51 AM

Quote
So if I understand you are saying that the demon is a systemic phenomenon? Not just something that happens in a particular person's brain because of how that person is built?


Yes :)  And therefore potentially changeable.


Changeable is good to hear. :)

Still, I wonder how it is that NO apparent change has occurred? What makes DH different from you and me? Didn't you, as I and I'm sure others here, once believe as Dave? We changed, he did not. I wonder what sort of systemic LOOP is going on here that prevents such change.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 20, 2016, 06:04:18 AM
My last best hope for you would be to suggest reading Josh McDowell ... "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" ... Josh was like you ... seeking evidence for God ... in fact, trying to disprove God. Again, good luck to you!
Where the usual davinition of "reading" applies?
I.e. skimming - very cursorily* - for "nuggets" that you can construe as supporting what you already believe?


* preferably - if you can obtain an electronic copy - using Ctrl-F to pick out a few key words that you can construe as supporting what you already believe.
Saves lots of time and mental effort!
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 06:12:20 AM
Hey Rex, good luck man. You appear to be blinkered like the rest but at least you're a bit polite so kudos for that.
Thanks, Dave.

Well, we can disagree and I still have respect for you as a fellow human. I respect your attempt at sustainable agriculture. I respect your attempt to leave a legacy.

I don't like that you didn't answer my question. Did you not begin with the belief in god before there was any evidence?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 20, 2016, 06:23:49 AM

Quote
So if I understand you are saying that the demon is a systemic phenomenon? Not just something that happens in a particular person's brain because of how that person is built?


Yes :)  And therefore potentially changeable.


Changeable is good to hear. :)

Still, I wonder how it is that NO apparent change has occurred? What makes DH different from you and me? Didn't you, as I and I'm sure others here, once believe as Dave? We changed, he did not. I wonder what sort of systemic LOOP is going on here that prevents such change.

My guess (and it's only that) is how much Bluffy has invested in his position. He's got a long history to protect, a blog, all his time on AtBC, Dawkins, IIDB, TR and now here, not to mention TWeb and others. I think there's also his need to be a maverick, a rebel. And I suspect he has not been all that he has claimed, particularly with regard to academia. There's also his childhood training. That can be very difficult to overcome.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 06:34:46 AM
So like Trump.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 06:38:41 AM
So like Trump.
Yes Cleopatra, so like Trump. Well, except Trump has money.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 06:39:25 AM
Damn, I just wasted $9.99 on the e-book of Josh McDowell. It's not even a book - just a set of notes ("a compiliation of my notes prepared for my lecture series on 'Christianity: Hoax or History?'"), designed to:

Quote
...help my brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ to write term papers, give speeches and inject into classroom dialogues their convictions about Christ, the Scriptures and the relevancy of Christianity in the 20th century.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 06:43:56 AM

RexT, I think you must not understand the reason for engaging with Bluffy, it's certainly not to convince him he is and has been publicly wrong for well over a decade, no, not that, but rather it's to see how far down the rabbit hole one can encourage him to go. To see where if he can be goaded into going where no man has gone before. To see just how silly he can get.

It's a sport, an art, a science, a skill and an amusing pasttime.

Yes, I do understand the reason others engage DH. It isn't the reason I do it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 06:46:10 AM
Damn, I just wasted $9.99 on the e-book of Josh McDowell. It's not even a book - just a set of notes ("a compiliation of my notes prepared for my lecture series on 'Christianity: Hoax or History?'"), designed to:
meh, that's no money for a rich girl like you.

ETA: let me know if his material such as it is convinces you of god.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 20, 2016, 06:49:08 AM
Quote
This presumes that scientists a-priori believe things regardless of the evidence. Why would you presume this patently false notion unless you yourself are prone to a-priori beliefs and projecting that onto others?
Age of the earth is one example.  The evidence for a young earth far outweighs the "evidence" for an old earth and has been presented many times to these people.  In fact the only "evidence" for an old earth requires unwarranted assumptions. 

Only when you reject evidence of an Old Earth and accept anything that might be evidence of a Young Earth.

For example why do the two tests give the same set of wrong (according to you) set of answers?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 06:50:57 AM
My guess (and it's only that) is how much Bluffy has invested in his position. He's got a long history to protect, a blog, all his time on AtBC, Dawkins, IIDB, TR and now here, not to mention TWeb and others. I think there's also his need to be a maverick, a rebel. And I suspect he has not been all that he has claimed, particularly with regard to academia. There's also his childhood training. That can be very difficult to overcome.
You're probably right. Were you, like me, indoctrinated as a child?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 20, 2016, 06:55:17 AM
My last best hope for you would be to suggest reading Josh McDowell ... "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" ... Josh was like you ... seeking evidence for God ... in fact, trying to disprove God. Again, good luck to you!

What about you guys predict `billions of dead things`but that is not what we find.
We find trillions of dead things.  As in too many to be explained by a Great Deluge.

And do the flood legends of the Wai Wai tribe support the Biblical version of the Flood?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 06:55:24 AM
Damn, I just wasted $9.99 on the e-book of Josh McDowell. It's not even a book - just a set of notes ("a compiliation of my notes prepared for my lecture series on 'Christianity: Hoax or History?'"), designed to:
meh, that's no money for a rich girl like you.

Comfortable, not rich by Trump standards (well, possibly richer, if the stories about Trumps tax returns turn out to be true).

But it stings when I spend it on a good faith attempt to find out what Dave is talking about, and I find I've wasted it on junk.

There's some material in there, but I haven't found anything that isn't either unsupported assertion or a reference to some other source.  And most of it seems handwavey in the extreme, when not special pleading.

If Dave can point me to a specific piece of evidence he finds persuasive, that might help.  But the fact that some archaeological finds seem to match biblical references doesn't tell us that the bible is reliable history.  It just tells us that some of what is written there was written about real places.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 20, 2016, 07:00:14 AM
My guess (and it's only that) is how much Bluffy has invested in his position. He's got a long history to protect, a blog, all his time on AtBC, Dawkins, IIDB, TR and now here, not to mention TWeb and others. I think there's also his need to be a maverick, a rebel. And I suspect he has not been all that he has claimed, particularly with regard to academia. There's also his childhood training. That can be very difficult to overcome.
You're probably right. Were you, like me, indoctrinated as a child?

Partially, but without much enthusiasm or conviction. Mother was Danish Lutherin, Father not sure, but they ended up Methodists because many of the other teachers at my Dad's school were. I stopped going to church at 12. I think my parents accepted that without much to do because I had already been a disruption in the Sunday School classes and the teachers there had made it clear they really didn't want me around. I went to the beach, assuming I wasn't already there. Can't believe I used to swim in that water. Cold, big ass waves, serious riptides and sharks (now and then).
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 20, 2016, 07:01:31 AM
Damn, I just wasted $9.99 on the e-book of Josh McDowell. It's not even a book - just a set of notes ("a compiliation of my notes prepared for my lecture series on 'Christianity: Hoax or History?'"), designed to:

Quote
...help my brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ to write term papers, give speeches and inject into classroom dialogues their convictions about Christ, the Scriptures and the relevancy of Christianity in the 20th century.

That Hawkins presents this as in the same category as Dalrymple's "Age of the Earth"  (without, of course, having ever even seen Dalrymple's book) tells you pretty much all you need to know about his pompous pronouncements on his credibility as a "scientist" (relative to pretty much any one else).
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 07:09:26 AM

Comfortable, not rich by Trump standards (well, possibly richer, if the stories about Trumps tax returns turn out to be true).
I can't wait to find out.
Quote
But it stings when I spend it on a good faith attempt to find out what Dave is talking about, and I find I've wasted it on junk.
Oh sure, I get that.

Quote
]There's some material in there, but I haven't found anything that isn't either unsupported assertion or a reference to some other source.  And most of it seems handwavey in the extreme, when not special pleading.

If Dave can point me to a specific piece of evidence he finds persuasive, that might help.  But the fact that some archaeological finds seem to match biblical references doesn't tell us that the bible is reliable history.  It just tells us that some of what is written there was written about real places.


Yeah, I wouldn't expect otherwise. Always the same old tired BS convincing only to those who already believe.

If no amount of evidence convinced him of god, no amount of evidence will convince him otherwise.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 20, 2016, 07:12:04 AM
Damn, I just wasted $9.99 on the e-book of Josh McDowell. It's not even a book - just a set of notes ("a compiliation of my notes prepared for my lecture series on 'Christianity: Hoax or History?'"), designed to:
meh, that's no money for a rich girl like you.

Comfortable, not rich by Trump standards (well, possibly richer, if the stories about Trumps tax returns turn out to be true).

But it stings when I spend it on a good faith attempt to find out what Dave is talking about, and I find I've wasted it on junk.

There's some material in there, but I haven't found anything that isn't either unsupported assertion or a reference to some other source.  And most of it seems handwavey in the extreme, when not special pleading.

If Dave can point me to a specific piece of evidence he finds persuasive, that might help.  But the fact that some archaeological finds seem to match biblical references doesn't tell us that the bible is reliable history.  It just tells us that some of what is written there was written about real places.

You mean like the Greek myths that talk about places like Crete, the Pillars of Hercules, Troy, Athens, Corinth, Thebes, Libya, etc must be the real deal because those real places are included in the myths?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 07:17:15 AM
My guess (and it's only that) is how much Bluffy has invested in his position. He's got a long history to protect, a blog, all his time on AtBC, Dawkins, IIDB, TR and now here, not to mention TWeb and others. I think there's also his need to be a maverick, a rebel. And I suspect he has not been all that he has claimed, particularly with regard to academia. There's also his childhood training. That can be very difficult to overcome.
You're probably right. Were you, like me, indoctrinated as a child?

Partially, but without much enthusiasm or conviction. Mother was Danish Lutherin, Father not sure, but they ended up Methodists because many of the other teachers at my Dad's school were. I stopped going to church at 12. I think my parents accepted that without much to do because I had already been a disruption in the Sunday School classes and the teachers there had made it clear they really didn't want me around. I went to the beach, assuming I wasn't already there. Can't believe I used to swim in that water. Cold, big ass waves, serious riptides and sharks (now and then).

Ah, we have a lot in common. You probably asked too many uncomfortable questions. And I too grew up with sharks and alligators in Florida. I'd never let my kids swim where me and my brother and sister swam. You know, I sometimes wonder if my parents didn't do everything they could legally do to get rid of us.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 07:19:10 AM
If no amount of evidence convinced him of god, no amount of evidence will convince him otherwise.

I've never bought this "you can't reason a person out of a position they didn't reason themselves into" thing :)

Most of our positions are what we are taught.  We don't arrive at most of what we believe to be true by reason.  It would take too much time for a start.  I believe that Paris is the capital of France, but I haven't personally verified it.  I also believe that the speed of light is constant, but I certainly didn't reason that out.

I think the key thing is not what convinced us (often an authoritative person or source, who/which we have no good reason to distrust), but the manner in which we hold the belief - provisionally, or absolutely.

Most of us hold what we believe provisionally, whether we reasoned ourselves into it or not.  But some people believe those things absolutely - even positions they reasoned themselves into! 

In fact, perhaps especially those, because they represented invested effort.  Easy enough to reject the Faith of our Fathers.  Sod the fathers.  A lot harder to reject the position we have carefully built up and reasoned ourselves, and possibly built a reputation out of defending.

And it happens in science (Dave will like to hear).  Fortunately there are always fresh waves of Young Turks with a career to make (this is the part that Dave doesn't get).  Science thrives by challenging the status quo, not by trying to preserve it.  The opposite is true of religion, which is why it has "dogma" and science doesn't.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 20, 2016, 07:24:26 AM
Quote
This presumes that scientists a-priori believe things regardless of the evidence. Why would you presume this patently false notion unless you yourself are prone to a-priori beliefs and projecting that onto others?
Age of the earth is one example.  The evidence for a young earth far outweighs the "evidence" for an old earth and has been presented many times to these people.  In fact the only "evidence" for an old earth requires unwarranted assumptions. 
This is bullshit and you know it.

Your mentors try to jump through hoops to create theories and cockamamie mechanisns that make it LOOK like the Earth is old (although -supposedly- it is in fact young).

You KNOW that, dave. You have quoted them multiple times.

Stop lying to yourself.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 20, 2016, 07:40:53 AM
Hey Rex, good luck man. You appear to be blinkered like the rest but at least you're a bit polite so kudos for that.
Thanks, Dave.

Well, we can disagree and I still have respect for you as a fellow human. I respect your attempt at sustainable agriculture. I respect your attempt to leave a legacy.

I don't like that you didn't answer my question. Did you not begin with the belief in god before there was any evidence?
I was force-fed a belief in God when I was young, then questioned everything in college which was why I read Josh McDowell.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 20, 2016, 07:42:03 AM
 By the way... I hold the belief in God provisionally.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 07:44:29 AM
Hey Rex, good luck man. You appear to be blinkered like the rest but at least you're a bit polite so kudos for that.
Thanks, Dave.

Well, we can disagree and I still have respect for you as a fellow human. I respect your attempt at sustainable agriculture. I respect your attempt to leave a legacy.

I don't like that you didn't answer my question. Did you not begin with the belief in god before there was any evidence?
I was force-fed a belief in God when I was young, then questioned everything in college which was why I read Josh McDowell.

You read Josh McDowell?  But it doesn't even seem to be a book.  How did you read it?  Can you give me a note that you found particularly convincing?

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 07:45:27 AM
By the way... I hold the belief in God provisionally.

So you think that belief in God is falsifiable? That some kind of evidence would disprove God in some way?

If so, such as?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 20, 2016, 07:47:21 AM
By the way... I hold the belief in God provisionally.
That's difficult to believe, given your resistance to evidence of an old earth - such as varves, ice cores, tree rings etc. You've never successfully refuted any of those. You just claim you have and don't actually show your work.

And if your belief in God is provisional, how do you think without a god a young earth came about? Aliens?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Photon on June 20, 2016, 08:12:19 AM
Dave, if you hold your god belief provisionally, kindly list the evidence that you would accept that would allow you to reject that god belief.

I don't think you are being honest here. And I don't think you will provide a genuine serious list.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 20, 2016, 09:41:48 AM
"Kindly"

 Why should I be kind to you?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 20, 2016, 09:47:59 AM
Hey Rex, good luck man. You appear to be blinkered like the rest but at least you're a bit polite so kudos for that.
Thanks, Dave.

Well, we can disagree and I still have respect for you as a fellow human. I respect your attempt at sustainable agriculture. I respect your attempt to leave a legacy.

I don't like that you didn't answer my question. Did you not begin with the belief in god before there was any evidence?
I was force-fed a belief in God when I was young, then questioned everything in college which was why I read Josh McDowell.

But you did not look for evidence of being wrong.
You only considered evidence that supported the views you already had.

Look on at the evidence you had when you first made up your mind.
All evidence after that does not count because you filtered it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 20, 2016, 09:48:45 AM
By the way... I hold the belief in God provisionally.

No you don't.

Do the flood legends of the Wai Wai tribe support the Biblical story of the Deluge?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 20, 2016, 09:50:07 AM
"Kindly"

 Why should I be kind to you?

It's what God tells you to do?
It's the Golden Rule?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 20, 2016, 09:55:19 AM
"Kindly"

 Why should I be kind to you?
Lol! Letting your true character shine in the light of day!

You're spiteful angry little man, Dave, and you like your women in their place, don't you. You've begun saying 'fuck' today also, I notice.

Don't post about your shit if you don't want honest responses. You've never been subjected to a formal crit of any of your work, have you. Any first year art student has thicker skin and better responses.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 10:00:12 AM
Oh boy yes.  Crit panels.

Way worse than anything you get from reviewers as a scientist.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 20, 2016, 10:02:55 AM
"Kindly"

 Why should I be kind to you?

It's what God tells you to do?
It's the Golden Rule?
I don't think Dave gives a single shit about God or emulating Jesus. God and the Bible are just convenient platforms on which to build his grandiose contrarian persona, in which he takes great pride. Note he almost never talks about God or Jesus except as preconceived 'evidence' for his dumbass YEC arguments. He either doesn't really believe in God at all, or doesn't care, or is one of those OSAS Christians who believe it doesn't matter how much of an asshole you are once you've been 'saved'.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 20, 2016, 10:05:05 AM
Oh boy yes.  Crit panels.

Way worse than anything you get from reviewers as a scientist.
I barely survived my first crit with my dignity intact. Not everyone did. There was a lot of crying and one guy almost took a swing at one of our professors.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 20, 2016, 10:05:55 AM
"Kindly"

 Why should I be kind to you?
It's common human courtesy.  Photon was kind to you and you should reciprocate.

But, of course, irredeemable assholes don't do that sort of thing.  Especially when they cannot admit they got nuthin'.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 10:17:27 AM
Oh boy yes.  Crit panels.

Way worse than anything you get from reviewers as a scientist.
I barely survived my first crit with my dignity intact. Not everyone did. There was a lot of crying and one guy almost took a swing at one of our professors.

One of my peers was tipped into psychosis (although, to be fair, it was coming anyway).  Emergency services had to take him away. He never came back.

You basically pin up your own soul for flaying.  Well, that's what it's like in architecture anyway, and that's an applied art.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 10:17:57 AM
[duplicate]


Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 20, 2016, 10:20:10 AM
"Photon has been kind to me."

Lol

And elephants can fly.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 20, 2016, 10:23:23 AM
"Photon has been kind to me."

Lol

And elephants can fly.

Just like Bluffy can offer rational, reasonable answers.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: borealis on June 20, 2016, 10:32:36 AM
Oh boy yes.  Crit panels.

Way worse than anything you get from reviewers as a scientist.
I barely survived my first crit with my dignity intact. Not everyone did. There was a lot of crying and one guy almost took a swing at one of our professors.

One of my peers was tipped into psychosis (although, to be fair, it was coming anyway).  Emergency services had to take him away. He never came back.

You basically pin up your own soul for flaying.  Well, that's what it's like in architecture anyway, and that's an applied art.
That's what it was like in our required Foundation year course, which was essentially the main studio class in which you spent at least three hours daily. In fact the first critted project was called a Personality Box, in which you were required to build some kind of container which had to be at least as tall as the student and then had to be manipulated/embellished to represent you. I can't think of a harsher method of introducing the process to a bunch of naïve fresh out of high school aspiring artists.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 20, 2016, 10:35:42 AM
"Photon has been kind to me."

Lol

And elephants can fly.
Photon wrote "kindly list the evidence that you would accept that would allow you to reject that god belief.".  That's a polite and kind request.

And, of course, you can't come up with any instances of Photon being unkind without severe provocation from you, asshole.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 10:39:13 AM
Oh boy yes.  Crit panels.

Way worse than anything you get from reviewers as a scientist.
I barely survived my first crit with my dignity intact. Not everyone did. There was a lot of crying and one guy almost took a swing at one of our professors.

One of my peers was tipped into psychosis (although, to be fair, it was coming anyway).  Emergency services had to take him away. He never came back.

You basically pin up your own soul for flaying.  Well, that's what it's like in architecture anyway, and that's an applied art.
That's what it was like in our required Foundation year course, which was essentially the main studio class in which you spent at least three hours daily. In fact the first critted project was called a Personality Box, in which you were required to build some kind of container which had to be at least as tall as the student and then had to be manipulated/embellished to represent you. I can't think of a harsher method of introducing the process to a bunch of naïve fresh out of high school aspiring artists.
:staregonk:
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: SkepticTank on June 20, 2016, 10:42:35 AM
Damn, I just wasted $9.99 on the e-book of Josh McDowell. It's not even a book - just a set of notes ("a compiliation of my notes prepared for my lecture series on 'Christianity: Hoax or History?'"), designed to:

Quote
...help my brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ to write term papers, give speeches and inject into classroom dialogues their convictions about Christ, the Scriptures and the relevancy of Christianity in the 20th century.

Which book is that?  McDowell seems to be publishing about every 6 months for the last several decades.



I was force-fed a belief in God when I was young, then questioned everything in college which was why I read Josh McDowell.

You read Josh McDowell?  But it doesn't even seem to be a book.  How did you read it?  Can you give me a note that you found particularly convincing?

 I'm guessing Dave is referring to Evidence That Demands a Verdict.  That seems to be one of his most popular books. Is that what you purchased, Pingu?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 10:43:02 AM
They were much kinder to us.  Our first project was to design a kite, the major test of which was whether it would fly, so that was fairly objective.  And as virtually anything will fly given the right wind, if you get the bridle angle right, and as the test day started blustery but got calmer as the afternoon went on, it was All Must Have Prizes.

After that, it got harder....
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 10:43:46 AM
Damn, I just wasted $9.99 on the e-book of Josh McDowell. It's not even a book - just a set of notes ("a compiliation of my notes prepared for my lecture series on 'Christianity: Hoax or History?'"), designed to:

Quote
...help my brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ to write term papers, give speeches and inject into classroom dialogues their convictions about Christ, the Scriptures and the relevancy of Christianity in the 20th century.

Which book is that?  McDowell seems to be publishing about every 6 months for the last several decades.



I was force-fed a belief in God when I was young, then questioned everything in college which was why I read Josh McDowell.

You read Josh McDowell?  But it doesn't even seem to be a book.  How did you read it?  Can you give me a note that you found particularly convincing?

 I'm guessing Dave is referring to Evidence That Demands a Verdict.  That seems to be one of his most popular books. Is that what you purchased, Pingu?

Yes.  :mad:

ETA I thought it might be some reasonably sensibly laid out argument at least.  But it's just a book of jottings.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: SkepticTank on June 20, 2016, 10:51:15 AM
I'm guessing Dave is referring to Evidence That Demands a Verdict.  That seems to be one of his most popular books. Is that what you purchased, Pingu?

Yes.  :mad:

ETA I thought it might be some reasonably sensibly laid out argument at least.  But it's just a book of jottings.

Strange, that's not how I see it described anywhere online. 
http://infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jury/

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 10:58:22 AM
If no amount of evidence convinced him of god, no amount of evidence will convince him otherwise.

I've never bought this "you can't reason a person out of a position they didn't reason themselves into" thing :)
It's just a rule-of-thumb thing I guess.

Quote
Most of our positions are what we are taught.  We don't arrive at most of what we believe to be true by reason.  It would take too much time for a start.  I believe that Paris is the capital of France, but I haven't personally verified it.  I also believe that the speed of light is constant, but I certainly didn't reason that out.

I think the key thing is not what convinced us (often an authoritative person or source, who/which we have no good reason to distrust), but the manner in which we hold the belief - provisionally, or absolutely.

Most of us hold what we believe provisionally, whether we reasoned ourselves into it or not.  But some people believe those things absolutely - even positions they reasoned themselves into! 

In fact, perhaps especially those, because they represented invested effort.  Easy enough to reject the Faith of our Fathers.  Sod the fathers.  A lot harder to reject the position we have carefully built up and reasoned ourselves, and possibly built a reputation out of defending.

And it happens in science (Dave will like to hear).  Fortunately there are always fresh waves of Young Turks with a career to make (this is the part that Dave doesn't get).  Science thrives by challenging the status quo, not by trying to preserve it.  The opposite is true of religion, which is why it has "dogma" and science doesn't.
All good points. Thanks.

So even scientists are humans and humans are reluctant to change their beliefs, roughly proportional to the investment in the belief?

So the problem is both systemic and individualistic, depending whether the individual holds a belief provisionally, or absolutely? The former might eventually find some evidence or reason that makes belief change possible and the latter might end up trapped.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 10:59:31 AM
Maybe I was scammed.

The preface starts:

Quote
What, another book?

No, this is not a book. It is a compilation of my notes prepared for my lecture series on "Christianity: Hoax of History?"  There has been a definite shortage in the area of documentation of historical evidence for the Christian faith.  Often students professors and laymen hae asked "How can we document and use what you and others teach?"

The contents seem to be as in your link, and the cover is as on the Amazon page.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: SkepticTank on June 20, 2016, 11:04:37 AM
eta:  Nevermind.  http://infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jury/intro.html  Ctrl-F notes
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 20, 2016, 11:11:10 AM
Maybe Pingu can get her money back with this:  http://infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/newetdav.html
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 20, 2016, 11:59:13 AM
Oh boy yes.  Crit panels.

Way worse than anything you get from reviewers as a scientist.
At times.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 20, 2016, 12:04:20 PM
By the way... I hold the belief in God provisionally.
What part of "stop lying to yourself" didn't you get?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 12:06:09 PM
Hey Rex, good luck man. You appear to be blinkered like the rest but at least you're a bit polite so kudos for that.
Thanks, Dave.

Well, we can disagree and I still have respect for you as a fellow human. I respect your attempt at sustainable agriculture. I respect your attempt to leave a legacy.

I don't like that you didn't answer my question. Did you not begin with the belief in god before there was any evidence?
I was force-fed a belief in God when I was young, then questioned everything in college which was why I read Josh McDowell.
Okay, thanks.

So you questioned everything back in college until Josh McDowell presented convincing evidence for god?  I haven't read McDowell, but I've listened to many debates between christian apologists and atheists. Dinesh D'Souza, William Lane Craig, John Lennox, and many others. None have any actual evidence for god. Their arguments are sometimes clever, but always fall short of their goal. I really doubt McDowell has good evidence for god since good evidence would convince us all.

My belief in god is also provisional. At the moment I hold the default position, which as you know is a lack of belief. I'll gladly shift to a belief in god as soon as there is sufficient evidence.

Perhaps the problem is only a difference in what you and I consider to be evidence.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 20, 2016, 12:13:20 PM
"Kindly"

 Why should I be kind to you?
LOL. Fine, dave. Angrily, rudely and aggressively list the evidence that you would accept that would allow you to reject that god belief.

(What, you thought you could tap-dance your way around that so easily?)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 20, 2016, 01:32:18 PM
Hey Rex, good luck man. You appear to be blinkered like the rest but at least you're a bit polite so kudos for that.
Thanks, Dave.

Well, we can disagree and I still have respect for you as a fellow human. I respect your attempt at sustainable agriculture. I respect your attempt to leave a legacy.

I don't like that you didn't answer my question. Did you not begin with the belief in god before there was any evidence?
I was force-fed a belief in God when I was young, then questioned everything in college which was why I read Josh McDowell.
Okay, thanks.

So you questioned everything back in college until Josh McDowell presented convincing evidence for god?  I haven't read McDowell, but I've listened to many debates between christian apologists and atheists. Dinesh D'Souza, William Lane Craig, John Lennox, and many others. None have any actual evidence for god. Their arguments are sometimes clever, but always fall short of their goal. I really doubt McDowell has good evidence for god since good evidence would convince us all.

My belief in god is also provisional. At the moment I hold the default position, which as you know is a lack of belief. I'll gladly shift to a belief in god as soon as there is sufficient evidence.

Perhaps the problem is only a difference in what you and I consider to be evidence.
Possibly. I can't recall the McDowell stuff without looking it up its been so long ... But I feel that this recent stuff from Shapiro and the Third Wayers is about as good as evidence gets for God.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 20, 2016, 01:39:39 PM
 Here's the "Shapiro argument" in a nutshell ...

1)  it has been a surprise to learn how thoroughly cells protect themselves from the type of accidental change that supposedly is responsible for all the diversity we see within the biosphere

2)  ergo Neo Darwinism is dead

3)  The committed non-theist which includes people like Shapiro responds as follows ... "well if RM + NS didn't do it, then there must have been some other mechanisms."

4)  this of course is a  theoretical possibility, but a better explanation ( which accords better with reality) is that an intelligence created life because that is the same logical inference we would make for example if we found a crashed spaceship on Mars.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 01:42:11 PM
Why do you call it "the Shapiro argument" when it isn't the argument made by Shapiro?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 20, 2016, 02:28:13 PM
Why do you call it "the Shapiro argument" when it isn't the argument made by Shapiro?
It isn't an argument at all.
It's a nestedly non-sequitur set of nonsensical statements.

"(2)" does not follow from "(1)".
"(3)" does not follow from either "(1)" OR "(2)".
"(4)" would only make sense if it were the only alternative to "(3)", but  - not only is it not the only alternative - it isn't even an alternative. If it were demonstrated that "RM + NS" is insufficient to account "for all the diversity we see within the biosphere", and therefore there "must have been other mechanisms", whether or not an "intelligence" is involved is beside the point. Intelligence is not a MECHANISM.  

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 20, 2016, 02:29:39 PM
Why do you call it "the Shapiro argument" when it isn't the argument made by Shapiro?
Because it's an "argument"* in which Hawkins invokes, talisman-like, the name of Shapiro!

* assuming a nonstandard davinition of the word "argument".
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 02:34:47 PM
Why do you call it "the Shapiro argument" when it isn't the argument made by Shapiro?
It isn't an argument at all.
It's a nestedly non-sequitur set of nonsensical statements.

"(2)" does not follow from "(1)".
"(4)" would only make sense if it were the only alternative to "(3)", but  - not only is it not the only alternative - it isn't even an alternative. If it were demonstrated that "RM + NS" is insufficient to account "for all the diversity we see within the biosphere", and therefore there "must have been other mechanisms", whether or not an "intelligence" is involved is beside the point. Intelligence is not a MECHANISM.  



Yeah.  It's fractally stupid.  You've only gone one iteration in.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 02:53:52 PM
Possibly. I can't recall the McDowell stuff without looking it up its been so long ... But I feel that this recent stuff from Shapiro and the Third Wayers is about as good as evidence gets for God.
Alright then. I guess my question is whether you count the Shapiro argument, or for that matter any argument, as evidence? I mean, say you have a certain file-box with a divider across the middle, separating the box into two equal halves, one half you label (EVIDENCE, E for short) the other you label (NON_EVIDENCE, N for short),  in your own personal filing method, which side of the box would you put arguments, (E) or (N), and why?

Another thing to file: a strand of DNA, (E) or (N), and why?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: SkepticTank on June 20, 2016, 02:55:32 PM
Why do you call it "the Shapiro argument" when it isn't the argument made by Shapiro?
It isn't an argument at all.
It's a nestedly non-sequitur set of nonsensical statements.

"(2)" does not follow from "(1)".
"(3)" does not follow from either "(1)" OR "(2)".
"(4)" would only make sense if it were the only alternative to "(3)", but  - not only is it not the only alternative - it isn't even an alternative. If it were demonstrated that "RM + NS" is insufficient to account "for all the diversity we see within the biosphere", and therefore there "must have been other mechanisms", whether or not an "intelligence" is involved is beside the point. Intelligence is not a MECHANISM.  



And even if you accept {4}, then why does that intelligence have to be the Christian God?  Why not a Deist Creator-God, or why not clever alien scientists?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 20, 2016, 03:04:31 PM
And let me reiterate: The "argument" Dave posted is NOT Shapiro's nor is it the argument of any member of the "Third Way" that I am aware of.

What they propose is natural selection above the level of the organism - the evolution of evolvability.  Which isn't even novel to them.

One example would be that reproductive fidelity is itself a selectively advantageous trait.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Doobie Keebler on June 20, 2016, 03:14:50 PM
Oh geez, Pingu is out 10 bucks in exchange for a totally underwhelming book that was written to huckster on the rubber chicken circuit and keep christians in the fold. It's been probably at least 15 years since I read it and I hardly remember much about it except the disappointment as I trudged through it. But hey Pingu, don't let any of my bias rub off on you. You might be all churched up by next week and Dave might stop calling you Pocopatra. There's always a silver lining.

Btw, IIRC, Dave's ol' special pal Glenn Morton ghost wrote the part of the book on evolution and no longer holds those views after he was shown evidence that contradicted what he wrote after word got around that he authored that part. It's been a while, but that's my vague memory of it. I can't find Glenn's post about it at the moment. It doesn't appear to be on the Wiki archiving his old site. (edit-as a matter of fact it might have been a listserv/usenet post now that I think about it)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Doobie Keebler on June 20, 2016, 03:21:12 PM
Sooo. How about those deserts ?   :sadcheer:
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 03:42:54 PM
Here's the "Shapiro argument" in a nutshell ...

1)  it has been a surprise to learn how thoroughly cells protect themselves from the type of accidental change that supposedly is responsible for all the diversity we see within the biosphere

2)  ergo Neo Darwinism is dead

3)  The committed non-theist which includes people like Shapiro responds as follows ... "well if RM + NS didn't do it, then there must have been some other mechanisms."

4)  this of course is a  theoretical possibility, but a better explanation ( which accords better with reality) is that an intelligence created life because that is the same logical inference we would make for example if we found a crashed spaceship on Mars.
I'm not sure you intended the labeling to be taken as a formal argument, which as VoxRat showed it certainly is not, so I'll just deal with what I think is the gist of your list It sorta boils down to; Neo Darwinism is unable to account for all diversity of life and some kind of intelligence could have done it.

Mainly, this argument (sometimes called god-of-the-gaps) fails to reach it's goal, if it's goal is to be evidence, because, as others have pointed out, it doesn't take into account other possibilities. It also ignores the progress made over time in filling the gaps in our knowledge. The time could come when diversity is fully explained.

It's true that if no possibility remained that could account for diversity, not even in principle, then an inference to intelligent design might exist. Since other possibilities exist, god must for now stay a theoretical possibility less likely than science filling that gap too.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Photon on June 20, 2016, 03:52:17 PM
"Kindly"

 Why should I be kind to you?

Whatever floats your boat, Dave.  I know kindness is not in your wheelhouse.  I think you'd be hard-pressed to find genuine unkindness from me to you, though I admit I have taken your words, and applied them to other arguments, to show how feebly they function as actual coherent debate, often for hilarious effect.  But if you've perceived that as unkind, I apologize. 

As your attitudinal assymmetry* will show, you are incapable of responding in kind with earnest, with humility, or genuine desire to search for truth. 

If you disagree, then please in whatever manner suits you personally, with kindness or unmitigated jackassery, list what evidence will convince you that your god-belief is unfounded.  If it is truly "provisional" this should be an easy request.

*coining a new term, davinated even?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 03:54:43 PM
Sooo. How about those deserts ?  :sadcheer:
I think the OP question was asked and answered. Still awaiting acknowledgment from Dave, I think.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 20, 2016, 04:01:24 PM
Here's the "Shapiro argument" in a nutshell ...

1)  it has been a surprise to learn how thoroughly cells protect themselves from the type of accidental change that supposedly is responsible for all the diversity we see within the biosphere

2)  ergo Neo Darwinism is dead

3)  The committed non-theist which includes people like Shapiro responds as follows ... "well if RM + NS didn't do it, then there must have been some other mechanisms."

4)  this of course is a  theoretical possibility, but a better explanation ( which accords better with reality) is that an intelligence created life because that is the same logical inference we would make for example if we found a crashed spaceship on Mars.

Dave, We take great precautions with electricity.
Does that mean that we don't use it?

The mutation rate has to be small for evolution to work.
Your number 1 is simple desperation.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 20, 2016, 04:34:57 PM
Here's the "Shapiro argument" in a nutshell ...

1)  it has been a surprise to learn how thoroughly cells protect themselves from the type of accidental change that supposedly is responsible for all the diversity we see within the biosphere
Yet that diversity exists. Nor is random mutation considered the only factor.

2)  ergo Neo Darwinism is dead
I don't see the connection. Just another "I just can't believe the odds" argument. Maybe you can explain this in your own words but with linked quotes to Shapiro and friends.

3)  The committed non-theist which includes people like Shapiro responds as follows ... "well if RM + NS didn't do it, then there must have been some other mechanisms."
Yes? And so?
There are other mechanisms and not knowing all of them does not mean any particular one is responsible.

4)  this of course is a  theoretical possibility, but a better explanation ( which accords better with reality) is that an intelligence created life because that is the same logical inference we would make for example if we found a crashed spaceship on Mars.
Not really. Yes, it would be likely the crashed spaceship was created by some intelligence, but the space ship being there says little to nothing about the intelligence that created it. To refer to a popular argument, yes, a watch found out in the middle of nowhere would strongly indicate it had been created by an intelligence, most likely a human intelligence, but it says little to nothing about what created that intelligence. In short,, the watch is not alive, it is not life. Nor is your imaginary spaceship. In both cases, the objects themselves are unable to offer any explanation for the creation mechanism of the intelligence that created them. In short, it's no argument at all.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 20, 2016, 04:45:01 PM
It's true that if no possibility remained that could account for diversity, not even in principle, then an inference to intelligent design might exist. Since other possibilities exist, god must for now stay a theoretical possibility less likely than science filling that gap too.
But, as I said, even if we DID arrive at that point, it's STILL not a mechanism.
It's simply a declaration that we don't know (all) the mechanisms that brought about life.
Even if you conclude that we can never know, saying "therefore God musta dunnit" doesn't tell you anything about mechanisms.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Doobie Keebler on June 20, 2016, 05:02:25 PM
Sooo. How about those deserts ?  :sadcheer:
I think the OP question was asked and answered. Still awaiting acknowledgment from Dave, I think.

Oh yeah, I follow Dave just enough to tap him in the nads occasionally. It's been a long ten years going on eleven. I'm pretty sure I was one of the ones he had on ignore over at TR, which is no biggie as I don't really seriously engage with him. He might not here yet as he's pretty high on the new shiny top notch reboot he's enjoying right now.

Although I should apologize to him for missing his AtBC prediction anniversary late last year I think. Dave supposedly had a big ol' meeting with Answers In Genesis that he said was so swell that it would be "unfashionable to be a Darwinist" in just five years time. That's was about 8 years ago or so, wasn't it buddy ? In November ?  The ol' memory is getting bad lately. I'll send something for the goats.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 20, 2016, 05:13:12 PM
He's often been proven to not be ignoring people he claimed to have "put on ignore". So often that it's reasonable to surmise that he never puts people on ignore.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Doobie Keebler on June 20, 2016, 05:24:46 PM
He's often been proven to not be ignoring people he claimed to have "put on ignore". So often that it's reasonable to surmise that he never puts people on ignore.

Hmmm, Double Secret Ignore.  :hmm:

(https://bplusmovieblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/dean-wormer-2-ab072010.jpg)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 20, 2016, 05:50:11 PM
But, as I said, even if we DID arrive at that point, it's STILL not a mechanism.
It's simply a declaration that we don't know (all) the mechanisms that brought about life.
Even if you conclude that we can never know, saying "therefore God musta dunnit" doesn't tell you anything about mechanisms.
Very true.

Also if a god was the mechanism that created life, what explains god? What is god? In this scenario god is a black-box. The output from a black-box-god is a world creating, life creating mechanism which humans cannot inquire into nor learn from. Nowhere to go from there.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 21, 2016, 10:09:26 AM
We cannot prove there is a God by seeng him. We can only infer that he exists from effects. And it so happens that many things in the natural world  appear to be designed  by an intelligence as Richard Dawkins has famously admitted.   The most logical inference from this evidence is "a designer" unless a  plausible "no design" mechanism can be proposed.   Since the naturalist's leading candidate for such a mechanism has now failed as shown by the "Third Wayers" ..: this leaves intelligent design as the most plausible explanation.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 21, 2016, 10:49:04 AM
We cannot prove there is a God by seeng him. We can only infer that he exists from effects. And it so happens that many things in the natural world  appear to be designed  by an intelligence as Richard Dawkins has famously admitted.   The most logical inference from this evidence is "a designer" unless a  plausible "no design" mechanism can be proposed.   Since the naturalist's leading candidate for such a mechanism has now failed as shown by the "Third Wayers" ..: this leaves intelligent design as the most plausible explanation.
Dave, before we examine if your argument is sound, do you believe that it is based on valid reasoning?

A clear and definite answer would be welcome.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 21, 2016, 11:28:18 AM
We cannot prove there is a God by seeng him. We can only infer that he exists from effects. And it so happens that many things in the natural world  appear to be designed  by an intelligence as Richard Dawkins has famously admitted.   The most logical inference from this evidence is "a designer" unless a  plausible "no design" mechanism can be proposed.   Since the naturalist's leading candidate for such a mechanism has now failed as shown by the "Third Wayers" ..: this leaves intelligent design as the most plausible explanation.
Nice preaching.
I guess.
(I'm not really in a position to make a very reliable assessment of preaching quality.)

Pathetic logic.
Well, not even logic.
Pathetic sophistry.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 21, 2016, 11:37:40 AM
We cannot prove there is a God by seeng him. We can only infer that he exists from effects. And it so happens that many things in the natural world  appear to be designed  by an intelligence as Richard Dawkins has famously admitted.  The most logical inference from this evidence is "a designer" unless a  plausible "no design" mechanism can be proposed.  Since the naturalist's leading candidate for such a mechanism has now failed as shown by the "Third Wayers" ..: this leaves intelligent design as the most plausible explanation.
Yeah, you already stated your viewpoint on this and I already responded. It's nothing more than another god-of-the-gaps argument. That argument failed long ago, intelligent design failed soon after it was presented. You are like Wendy Wright, who, even as Richard Dawkins explained to her what and where the evidence could be found, she kept repeating "show me the evidence". She doesn't want to see the evidence and apparently neither do you.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 21, 2016, 11:38:56 AM
We cannot prove there is a God by seeng him. We can only infer that he exists from effects. And it so happens that many things in the natural world  appear to be designed  by an intelligence as Richard Dawkins has famously admitted.   The most logical inference from this evidence is "a designer" unless a  plausible "no design" mechanism can be proposed.   Since the naturalist's leading candidate for such a mechanism has now failed as shown by the "Third Wayers" ..: this leaves intelligent design as the most plausible explanation.

Um, how do you know seeing your god would not prove he exists? Seems like that would be pretty dang powerful evidence of his existence.

What about all the many more things that do not appear to be designed, at least not by an intelligent designer? And what qualifies a designer as intelligent? Indeed, how can one tell what has been intelligently designed? What are the criteria used to do so? How do you tell that something is/was not intelligently designed? What criteria apply then?

As far as I know, the "ThirdWayers" have not invalidated RM + NS nor any of the other components of the ToE.  Indeed, the Third Way website has this to say in its abstract: "The vast majority of people believe that there are only two alternative ways to explain the origins of biological diversity. One way is Creationism that depends upon intervention by a divine Creator. That is clearly unscientific because it brings an arbitrary supernatural force into the evolution process."  Kind of takes the wind out of your sails, doesn't it. The main quote on Shapiro's page in the website is:  "The capacity of living organisms to alter their own heredity is undeniable. Our current ideas about evolution have to incorporate this basic fact of life." Hmmm, nothing there about invalidating the mainstream, but suggesting it needs additional mechanisms, notably not including gods. Please note, I don't necessarily accept all of Shapiro's ideas and as far as I know, he has not conclusively demonstrated their validity, not that I would necessarily know if he had.

Quoting Richard Dawkins is meaningless. He has his opinions but for the most practical part he's a publicist, not a research scientist.

And, no, since nothing you have cited refutes the ToE nor supports ID, your claims for it are also meaningless.

In short, because you already "know" your god exists, then anything you come across that you feel supports that "knowledge" is evidence for it. And anything that conflicts with the "knowledge" is not evidence of anything.

So you still haven't presented any specific means of demonstrating the existence of your god. Until you do, well, you have next to nothing.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 21, 2016, 03:45:35 PM
We cannot prove there is a God by seeng him. We can only infer that he exists from effects. And it so happens that many things in the natural world  appear to be designed  by an intelligence as Richard Dawkins has famously admitted.  The most logical inference from this evidence is "a designer" unless a  plausible "no design" mechanism can be proposed.  Since the naturalist's leading candidate for such a mechanism has now failed as shown by the "Third Wayers" ..: this leaves intelligent design as the most plausible explanation.
Yeah, you already stated your viewpoint on this and I already responded. It's nothing more than another god-of-the-gaps argument. That argument failed long ago, intelligent design failed soon after it was presented. You are like Wendy Wright, who, even as Richard Dawkins explained to her what and where the evidence could be found, she kept repeating "show me the evidence". She doesn't want to see the evidence and apparently neither do you.
The Third Wayers are essentially laughing at Dawkins and this "evidence" of his.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 21, 2016, 03:53:10 PM
 I don't even think any of the regulars here defend Dawkins anymore.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 21, 2016, 04:04:22 PM
I don't even think any of the regulars here defend Dawkins anymore.

Anymore? Also, it depends what you mean by 'defend'. I read the god delusion. It was decent for what it was. In terms of science, he isn't a scientist. He is a science communicator. That's a different thing. So, it's fairly common that he communicates things poorly or gets his science a little bit off, and it's damn near universal that he speaks with the common aristocratic british speech impediment caused by having their classist heads up their privileged asses. None of that necessarily reflects what you are talking about though.

If you are talking about horizontal gene transfer in prokaryotes indicating an entirely different set of evolutionary circumstances for the prokaryotes than for the eukaryotes, then I guess you'd have to show me what specific dawkins passage you mean and my guess is that he would probably agree, at least if he had a discussion with someone who understood the concept.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 21, 2016, 04:08:13 PM
Sooo. How about those deserts ?   :sadcheer:

We're all out of Chocolate Eclairs but there's plenty of Bluffy ala Mode.


True, much of it is old and well past its prime, but, hey, it's cheap.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 21, 2016, 04:26:38 PM
I don't even think any of the regulars here defend Dawkins anymore.

Depends which statement you are talking about.

Contrary to your "Team Darwin" bullshit, we assess arguments on their merits, not people on their team affiliations.

Dawkins has written some wonderful pop science books, but he's not actually an evolutionary biologist (he's an ethologist), and sometimes he makes some bloopers.  More annoyingly, he is incredibly naive about creationists and their bullshit arguments and straw men.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 21, 2016, 04:37:42 PM
The Third Wayers are essentially laughing at Dawkins and this "evidence" of his.
Since you don't know what evidence Dawkins presented to Ms. Wright, this is obvious bluster and bravado.
Also, you are obviously ignorant on what these so-called "Third Wayers" have written. You haven't read a single book any of them have written. So your representations of what they might or might not be "laughing" at are more obvious bluster and bravado.

It's really profoundly dishonest: pretending that you know things about which you actually lack the first clue.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 21, 2016, 04:57:20 PM
I've read quite a lot of the "Third Wayer" literature, including Shapiro's book, and a number of his papers.  I've also read quite a lot by Denis Noble and corresponded with him.

Dave shows no interest in this, nor any indication that he has the first clue about anything they've written.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 21, 2016, 04:57:43 PM
We cannot prove there is a God by seeng him. We can only infer that he exists from effects. And it so happens that many things in the natural world  appear to be designed  by an intelligence as Richard Dawkins has famously admitted.  The most logical inference from this evidence is "a designer" unless a  plausible "no design" mechanism can be proposed.  Since the naturalist's leading candidate for such a mechanism has now failed as shown by the "Third Wayers" ..: this leaves intelligent design as the most plausible explanation.
Yeah, you already stated your viewpoint on this and I already responded. It's nothing more than another god-of-the-gaps argument. That argument failed long ago, intelligent design failed soon after it was presented. You are like Wendy Wright, who, even as Richard Dawkins explained to her what and where the evidence could be found, she kept repeating "show me the evidence". She doesn't want to see the evidence and apparently neither do you.
The Third Wayers are essentially laughing at Dawkins and this "evidence" of his.
I doubt that. Though I also doubt they find Dawkins all that impressive these days. He's getting old and, as noted, is apparently blind to people conning him. Meh.

On the other hand, the Third Wayers would definitely be laughing at your take on their theories. Or perhaps crying over the fact that a fellow human could be so utterly convinced he is right when it's so utterly obvious he hasn't a clue. DK, thy name is Bluffy.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 21, 2016, 04:58:42 PM
I don't even think any of the regulars here defend Dawkins anymore.

Ironically, Bluffy, nobody has ever defended you.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 21, 2016, 05:44:00 PM
The Third Wayers are essentially laughing at Dawkins and this "evidence" of his.
The evidence Dawkins presents isn't his. He doesn't own it any more than you or I own it. It's in libraries and museums and really all around us and it comes from the honest hard work of countless brilliant and many not as brilliant but very dedicated students and practitioners of science.

Dawkins knows the evidence, at least enough, and he is pretty good at explaining it in simple enough terms that almost anyone can understand it. If you don't understand the evidence the way Dawkins explains it, there are plenty others who can explain it. There are people in this very forum who could do it. Not me, since I lost interest in researching evolution once I was satisfied that it DOES explain the diversity of life. Actually, it was after reading Darwin's "The Origin Of Species" that convinced me evolution is a fact.

The evidence is overwhelmingly convincing and available to all who seek it. You can set aside your beliefs long enough to learn the evidence for yourself. Or not.

In truth, it doesn't matter to the world whether Rex and Dave except this or that fact. So if knowing the facts of life isn't as important to you as it is to me (it matters to me that my beliefs are true), we'll never agree on that one point. You'll still spend your life as you see fit and so will I.


Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 21, 2016, 05:46:04 PM
I've read quite a lot of the "Third Wayer" literature, including Shapiro's book, and a number of his papers.  I've also read quite a lot by Denis Noble and corresponded with him.

Dave shows no interest in this, nor any indication that he has the first clue about anything they've written.
You've "read" them sort of like you've "read" Price?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 21, 2016, 05:53:03 PM
I don't even think any of the regulars here defend Dawkins anymore.

Ironically, Bluffy, nobody has ever defended you.

You reminded me. I meant to ask folks here if Dave has ever presented an idea(s), (either original or borrowed) that garnered much support or better still a consensus? Conversely, has anyone here ever presented an idea(s) that Dave conceded to?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 21, 2016, 05:54:19 PM
Quote
You've "read" them sort of like you've "read" Price?
When Pingu uses the word, 'read', I'm pretty confident she means the same thing the rest of humanity means when they use that word.

Very different from what you mean.

I have read - in the normal sense, i.e. every page, every word - Denis Noble's "The Music of Life".
There certainly is no support for your dumb, ignorant, notions there.

I have read - in fact, assigned - some of Shapiro's actual research papers (not to be confused with his polemical essays).
Certainly no support for your dumb, ignorant, notions there, either.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: VoxRat on June 21, 2016, 05:58:04 PM
You reminded me. I meant to ask folks here if Dave has ever presented an idea(s), (either original or borrowed) that garnered much support or better still a consensus? Conversely, has anyone here ever presented an idea(s) that Dave conceded to?
I can't think of anything significant in either category.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 21, 2016, 05:59:33 PM
I don't even think any of the regulars here defend Dawkins anymore.

Ironically, Bluffy, nobody has ever defended you.

You reminded me. I meant to ask folks here if Dave has ever presented an idea(s), (either original or borrowed) that garnered much support or better still a consensus? Conversely, has anyone here ever presented an idea(s) that Dave conceded to?

There's been the odd comment or two here and there, but for the most part on any substantive issue, no.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 21, 2016, 06:04:33 PM
Thanks guys. I can't say I'm surprised.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 21, 2016, 06:27:43 PM
I've read quite a lot of the "Third Wayer" literature, including Shapiro's book, and a number of his papers.  I've also read quite a lot by Denis Noble and corresponded with him.

Dave shows no interest in this, nor any indication that he has the first clue about anything they've written.
You've "read" them sort of like you've "read" Price?
As in reading orders of magnitude more of them than you, and (unlike you) understanding what they wrote and the value thereof?

What she's posted makes it obvious she has done that.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 21, 2016, 06:53:59 PM
Thanks guys. I can't say I'm surprised.

I believe there have been some conversions though, people who had been religiously inclined whom Bluffy convinced should walk away from that path. I other words, Bluffy's effect has been negative.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 21, 2016, 08:22:45 PM
I believe there have been some conversions though, people who had been religiously inclined whom Bluffy convinced should walk away from that path. I other words, Bluffy's effect has been negative.
You mean negative from his point of view. That's interesting. And probably I'd wager the same effect occurs from the bad arguments you get from the various professional Christian apologists. They are unable to convince but few that don't already believe and sometimes nudge the fence-sitters away from them. Maybe we should pay Dave to keep doing what he does best if we could present him to a larger audience. If Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort can do it, so could Dave.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 21, 2016, 10:17:41 PM
I don't even think any of the regulars here defend Dawkins anymore.

Ironically, Bluffy, nobody has ever defended you.

You reminded me. I meant to ask folks here if Dave has ever presented an idea(s), (either original or borrowed) that garnered much support or better still a consensus? Conversely, has anyone here ever presented an idea(s) that Dave conceded to?
Interestingly enough, I agree with a great deal of the ideas presented in the sources Dave borrows his permaculture/sustainability material from. However, there is a semi wide gulf between my views and Dave's, based mostly on my having actually read the sources and Dave having actually not read the sources but rather picked out sound bites from people who are selling the idea and also based on his profound inability to connect ideas into a functional systems logic. 

He absolutely unequivocally does not get nonlinear scaling. 
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Doobie Keebler on June 21, 2016, 10:18:37 PM
I've read quite a lot of the "Third Wayer" literature, including Shapiro's book, and a number of his papers.  I've also read quite a lot by Denis Noble and corresponded with him.

Dave shows no interest in this, nor any indication that he has the first clue about anything they've written.
You've "read" them sort of like you've "read" Price?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Holy shit, that's some gold standard projection there.
In fact, one might wonder if it's a petulant child doing it on purpose.
Dave is a little too "on the nose" with his IKYABWAI lately.

In any case, thanks for the belly laugh, Dave.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 21, 2016, 10:22:18 PM
I believe there have been some conversions though, people who had been religiously inclined whom Bluffy convinced should walk away from that path. I other words, Bluffy's effect has been negative.
You mean negative from his point of view. That's interesting. And probably I'd wager the same effect occurs from the bad arguments you get from the various professional Christian apologists. They are unable to convince but few that don't already believe and sometimes nudge the fence-sitters away from them. Maybe we should pay Dave to keep doing what he does best if we could present him to a larger audience. If Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort can do it, so could Dave.
After that 'debate' I linked earlier in this thread, I was contacted by some young people in a bible study group who had followed it at the advice of someone else who participated at Dawkins' site and they thanked me for doing it. I don't know what views they started with or whether their views changed but they thanked me for doing what I did which was to use it as a platform to expose the lie in creationist 'science' with a broad enough scope to make it clear that it was fraudulent.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 21, 2016, 11:14:38 PM
I've read quite a lot of the "Third Wayer" literature, including Shapiro's book, and a number of his papers.  I've also read quite a lot by Denis Noble and corresponded with him.

Dave shows no interest in this, nor any indication that he has the first clue about anything they've written.
You've "read" them sort of like you've "read" Price?

Yes, but with a great deal more interest and pleasure.

And, as I've told you, Denis Noble even wrote to me to say how well I'd understood  and expressed his meaning.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 22, 2016, 02:04:24 AM
I don't even think any of the regulars here defend Dawkins anymore.

Ironically, Bluffy, nobody has ever defended you.

You reminded me. I meant to ask folks here if Dave has ever presented an idea(s), (either original or borrowed) that garnered much support or better still a consensus? Conversely, has anyone here ever presented an idea(s) that Dave conceded to?
Interestingly enough, I agree with a great deal of the ideas presented in the sources Dave borrows his permaculture/sustainability material from. However, there is a semi wide gulf between my views and Dave's, based mostly on my having actually read the sources and Dave having actually not read the sources but rather picked out sound bites from people who are selling the idea and also based on his profound inability to connect ideas into a functional systems logic. 

He absolutely unequivocally does not get nonlinear scaling. 
So let's see if you have the ability today to explain - coherently, in a way that doesn't make you appear drunk - what you mean.  With specifics. 
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 22, 2016, 02:53:15 AM
Well, do you know what "linear scaling" means?
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 22, 2016, 02:53:57 AM
And what has this to do with the question as to whether deserts can "green naturally"?

(They can.)
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 22, 2016, 02:57:52 AM
And what has this to do with the question as to whether deserts can "green naturally"?

(They can.)
No I don't know.  Being mysterious doesn't help move the conversation forward.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Dave Hawkins on June 22, 2016, 02:58:08 AM
What I DO know is that your objections are normally bullshit.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 22, 2016, 03:39:56 AM
And what has this to do with the question as to whether deserts can "green naturally"?

(They can.)
No I don't know.  Being mysterious doesn't help move the conversation forward.

If you don't know what the question has to do with whether deserts can "green naturally" why the hell are you asking it in this thread?

If you want to talk about scaling up your vanity project, do it in your vanity project thread.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on June 22, 2016, 03:40:49 AM
What I DO know is that your objections are normally bullshit.

No, you don't.  You only know that you think they are.  I'd say that is because you don't have a clue.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 22, 2016, 05:12:37 AM
I've read quite a lot of the "Third Wayer" literature, including Shapiro's book, and a number of his papers.  I've also read quite a lot by Denis Noble and corresponded with him.

Dave shows no interest in this, nor any indication that he has the first clue about anything they've written.
You've "read" them sort of like you've "read" Price?
LOL, dave accuses others of not "reading" properly.

The Hubris knows no bounds.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 22, 2016, 05:13:57 AM
What I DO know is that your objections are normally bullshit.
:rofl:
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Faid on June 22, 2016, 05:17:29 AM
Well, do you know what "linear scaling" means?
Dave thinks that vertical walls of soft sediment hundreds of feet high can stand and not collapse, because a vertical slice of fudge cake can stand and not collapse.

So... Yeah.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 22, 2016, 05:26:26 AM
I've read quite a lot of the "Third Wayer" literature, including Shapiro's book, and a number of his papers.  I've also read quite a lot by Denis Noble and corresponded with him.

Dave shows no interest in this, nor any indication that he has the first clue about anything they've written.
You've "read" them sort of like you've "read" Price?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Holy shit, that's some gold standard projection there.
In fact, one might wonder if it's a petulant child doing it on purpose.
Dave is a little too "on the nose" with his IKYABWAI lately.

In any case, thanks for the belly laugh, Dave.
Naw, it's just Dave.

"I want to insult here.  What can i use?  Well, she's always accusing me of not comprehending Price or Shapiro so I'll just do the same to her!"

No consideration whatsoever of whether the insult is justified or not.  He doesn't care whether or not it's true.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 22, 2016, 05:30:05 AM
And what has this to do with the question as to whether deserts can "green naturally"?

(They can.)
No I don't know.  Being mysterious doesn't help move the conversation forward.
Then why do you do it so much?

She's not being mysterious.  She's trying to find out exactly how little you know so as to pick an appropriate starting point for the exposition.

Duh.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 22, 2016, 05:37:32 AM
Naw, it's just Dave.

"I want to insult here.  What can i use?  Well, she's always accusing me of not comprehending Price or Shapiro so I'll just do the same to her!"

No consideration whatsoever of whether the insult is justified or not.  He doesn't care whether or not it's true.
Nail on the head. Dave, as with any fundamentalist doesn't CARE whether their beliefs are true.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 22, 2016, 05:57:11 AM
I don't even think any of the regulars here defend Dawkins anymore.

Ironically, Bluffy, nobody has ever defended you.

You reminded me. I meant to ask folks here if Dave has ever presented an idea(s), (either original or borrowed) that garnered much support or better still a consensus? Conversely, has anyone here ever presented an idea(s) that Dave conceded to?
Interestingly enough, I agree with a great deal of the ideas presented in the sources Dave borrows his permaculture/sustainability material from. However, there is a semi wide gulf between my views and Dave's, based mostly on my having actually read the sources and Dave having actually not read the sources but rather picked out sound bites from people who are selling the idea and also based on his profound inability to connect ideas into a functional systems logic. 

He absolutely unequivocally does not get nonlinear scaling. 
So let's see if you have the ability today to explain - coherently, in a way that doesn't make you appear drunk - what you mean.  With specifics.
I can't help appearing drunk.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RexT on June 22, 2016, 06:07:20 AM
After that 'debate' I linked earlier in this thread, I was contacted by some young people in a bible study group who had followed it at the advice of someone else who participated at Dawkins' site and they thanked me for doing it. I don't know what views they started with or whether their views changed but they thanked me for doing what I did which was to use it as a platform to expose the lie in creationist 'science' with a broad enough scope to make it clear that it was fraudulent.
I wouldn't be surprised that you helped a few (the objective minded few) to settle some unanswered questions and thus tip them away from the dogma an toward the scientific understanding of the world.

On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if some were just doing their Christian duty to be polite and thank the poor lost atheist.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: JonF on June 22, 2016, 06:13:48 AM
Naw, it's just Dave.

"I want to insult here.  What can i use?  Well, she's always accusing me of not comprehending Price or Shapiro so I'll just do the same to her!"

No consideration whatsoever of whether the insult is justified or not.  He doesn't care whether or not it's true.
Nail on the head. Dave, as with any fundamentalist doesn't CARE whether their beliefs are true.

Actually, on reflection he doesn't care whether his beliefs correspond to reality.  He is unalterably convinced they're true.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 22, 2016, 06:14:55 AM
And what has this to do with the question as to whether deserts can "green naturally"?

(They can.)

Not only can they, apparently they are.
https://www.google.com/search?q=are+deserts+greening&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8


Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 22, 2016, 06:16:43 AM
And what has this to do with the question as to whether deserts can "green naturally"?

(They can.)
No I don't know.  Being mysterious doesn't help move the conversation forward.

You don't know what? There's no mystery to Pingu's post, none at all. Perhaps you're the one that's drinking this morning but your posts so far have been, well, disconnected.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 22, 2016, 06:18:17 AM
What I DO know is that your objections are normally bullshit.

Unfortunately for you, Bluffy, asserting something is not the same as demonstrating it. Apparently a lesson you are completely immune to, whether by incapacity or unwillingness isn't certain but the immunity is.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 22, 2016, 06:20:51 AM
After that 'debate' I linked earlier in this thread, I was contacted by some young people in a bible study group who had followed it at the advice of someone else who participated at Dawkins' site and they thanked me for doing it. I don't know what views they started with or whether their views changed but they thanked me for doing what I did which was to use it as a platform to expose the lie in creationist 'science' with a broad enough scope to make it clear that it was fraudulent.
I wouldn't be surprised that you helped a few (the objective minded few) to settle some unanswered questions and thus tip them away from the dogma an toward the scientific understanding of the world.

On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if some were just doing their Christian duty to be polite and thank the poor lost atheist.

Well, they were a little more forthcoming than that. The exchange was over believing in god as somewhat a separate thing from requiring the bible make sense. I agreed that the two worked better when kept gently separated. They were pretty clear that YEC was something that had come to their attention and that they were trying to assess it.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 22, 2016, 06:20:57 AM
What I DO know is that your objections are normally bullshit.

No, you don't.  You only know that you think they are.  I'd say that is because you don't have a clue.

Um, Pingu, it's not that he "thinks" they are, it's that he wants them to be bullshit. Otherwise he would have to face reality and that's something he is very unlikely to do.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Testy Calibrate on June 22, 2016, 06:21:22 AM
And what has this to do with the question as to whether deserts can "green naturally"?

(They can.)
No I don't know.  Being mysterious doesn't help move the conversation forward.

You don't know what? There's no mystery to Pingu's post, none at all. Perhaps you're the one that's drinking this morning but your posts so far have been, well, disconnected.

what linear scaling means.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 22, 2016, 06:25:19 AM
I've read quite a lot of the "Third Wayer" literature, including Shapiro's book, and a number of his papers.  I've also read quite a lot by Denis Noble and corresponded with him.

Dave shows no interest in this, nor any indication that he has the first clue about anything they've written.
You've "read" them sort of like you've "read" Price?
LOL, dave accuses others of not "reading" properly.

The Hubris knows no bounds.

I disagree, the Bluffoonoid Hubris definitely has lower bounds. Upper? Don't know, no matter how high a value is reached, experience has shown that sooner or later, that value will be exceeded.  Of course, there's always the possibility it could reach a maximum. Perhaps someone could formulate an hypothesis on whether or not Bluffoonoid Hubris does have a theoretical maximum.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 22, 2016, 06:25:59 AM
What I DO know is that your objections are normally bullshit.
:rofl:

Yup, he took the words right out of my mouth.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on June 22, 2016, 06:35:43 AM
And what has this to do with the question as to whether deserts can "green naturally"?

(They can.)
No I don't know.  Being mysterious doesn't help move the conversation forward.

You don't know what? There's no mystery to Pingu's post, none at all. Perhaps you're the one that's drinking this morning but your posts so far have been, well, disconnected.

what linear scaling means.

If that was his intent, then he should have quoted that post. He quoted the next post in which Pingu asked the question as to what (presumably - she should have made it much clearer) linear scaling has to do with the question of deserts greening which it would be great if we could get back to that with Bluffy commenting on the Google hit list I've posted a couple times. Or better, he should have quoted both of Pingu's posts.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: SkepticTank on June 22, 2016, 09:31:41 AM
 [mod] Split the post-atheism discussion to here (http://mcfrye.com/tr/index.php?topic=150.0)[/mod]
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: SkepticTank on June 22, 2016, 10:01:33 AM
[mod]three more :whyyou:
eta: fixed the link above[/mod]
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: buttershug on June 23, 2016, 09:49:33 AM
We cannot prove there is a God by seeng him. We can only infer that he exists from effects. And it so happens that many things in the natural world  appear to be designed  by an intelligence as Richard Dawkins has famously admitted.   The most logical inference from this evidence is "a designer" unless a  plausible "no design" mechanism can be proposed.   Since the naturalist's leading candidate for such a mechanism has now failed as shown by the "Third Wayers" ..: this leaves intelligent design as the most plausible explanation.

The third way is a no design option.
You simply do not understand why.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: nesb on December 20, 2016, 08:47:28 PM
Quote from:  RexT
But so too does the moth choose to go into the light.

So I have to necro this thread, because I didn't want to start a new one, in order to give my moth theory (I found this thread, searching for "moth"). I noticed a fly or something, trapped in a can, and thought he could get out if he just went towards the light. So maybe moths go towards lights, in case they burrow into a trap as larvae. Someone could probably test if their tendency helps out, by putting them in cans, and seeing how well they do at escaping, compared to other flying insects. Which would prove nothing, but would be interesting.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Fenrir on January 20, 2017, 05:05:20 PM
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/01/170118181741.htm (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/01/170118181741.htm)

Quote
Rainfall patterns in the Sahara during the 6,000-year 'Green Sahara' period have been pinpointed by analyzing marine sediments. From 5,000 to 11,000 years ago, what is now the Sahara Desert had ten times the rainfall it does today and was home to hunter-gatherers who lived in the region's savannahs and wooded grasslands. The new research is the first to compile a continuous record of the region's rainfall going 25,000 years into the past.

There's a whole herd of elephants, and a few giraffes, and a sloth for Dave to ignore in there.
Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: RAFH on January 20, 2017, 05:13:19 PM
We cannot prove there is a God by seeng him. We can only infer that he exists from effects. And it so happens that many things in the natural world  appear to be designed  by an intelligence as Richard Dawkins has famously admitted.  The most logical inference from this evidence is "a designer" unless a  plausible "no design" mechanism can be proposed.  Since the naturalist's leading candidate for such a mechanism has now failed as shown by the "Third Wayers" ..: this leaves intelligent design as the most plausible explanation.
Um, must have missed this.

Why wouldn't actually seeing a god not be evidence of that god's existence? Wouldn't that be an "effect"? I'd think it'd be a rather dramatic effect.

BTW, no, the Third Wayers did not show the failure of classic evolution, they showed there is another avenue for evolution, ie - HGT. But it applies only in prokaryotes, not in Eukaryotes.

In short, you fail, again. Probably because you didn't really read the ThirdWayers. Just searched for "nuggets" you thought supported your apriori conclusions. As usual.

Title: Re: Are there any deserts presently greening naturally?
Post by: Pingu on January 21, 2017, 04:31:44 AM
We cannot prove there is a God by seeng him. We can only infer that he exists from effects. And it so happens that many things in the natural world  appear to be designed  by an intelligence as Richard Dawkins has famously admitted.  The most logical inference from this evidence is "a designer" unless a  plausible "no design" mechanism can be proposed.  Since the naturalist's leading candidate for such a mechanism has now failed as shown by the "Third Wayers" ..: this leaves intelligent design as the most plausible explanation.
Um, must have missed this.

Why wouldn't actually seeing a god not be evidence of that god's existence? Wouldn't that be an "effect"? I'd think it'd be a rather dramatic effect.

BTW, no, the Third Wayers did not show the failure of classic evolution, they showed there is another avenue for evolution, ie - HGT. But it applies only in prokaryotes, not in Eukaryotes.

In short, you fail, again. Probably because you didn't really read the ThirdWayers. Just searched for "nuggets" you thought supported your apriori conclusions. As usual.

Actually, the point of the Third Wayers isn't just that there are horizontal vectors of gene transfer, in fact I wouldn't say that was even the main theme.

I would say that the main theme is that we can understand natural selection much better if we do not focus exclusively on the gene as the target of selection, or even the organism - that selection can occur at the level of the population as well. This means that mutation rates and mechanisms themselves are subject to natural selection.

The target of their polemic isn't "Darwinism" but the neo-Darwinist hyperfocus on the gene.  Which is a bit of a straw man, it has to be said, but then that's the nature of polemics.

Below is Denis Noble's summary of the change in approach, from his paper, Physiology is rocking the foundations of evolutionary biology (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1113/expphysiol.2012.071134/abstract):


Before: Modern Synthesis   Now: towards an Integrative Synthesis
Gene-centred view of natural selection   Selection is multilevel
Impossibility of inheritance of acquired characteristicsAcquired characters can be inherited
Distinction between replicator (genes) and vehicle (phenotype)   The genome is an 'organ of the cell', not its dictator. Control is distributed
The central dogma of molecular biologyGenomes are not isolated from organism and environment