View Single Post
  #967  
Old 06-10-2019, 11:14 AM
SamuelA is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutMan View Post
Sammy's problem (well, one of many) is that he seems incapable of thinking about anything beyond a surficial level. He is fond of saying he thought about something for a couple minutes and the solution is perfectly clear, and that lack of deep thought is obvious.

Hmmm, some gas doesn't trap heat in the atmosphere? Perfect, just use that to solve global waming! But no thought to other impacts to things like to hydrological cycle, or how to determine the correct dosage.

Someone built a cableway up a mountain somewhere? Perfect, we can just do the same thing on any mountain. But no thought to how Everest is different from the other place. Brain synapses are electric signals? No problem, we can just write code to mimic them.

And with no additional thought, of course his solutions seem simple to him, and anyone who can't see them must be a moron. He is incapable of considering that maybe everyone else has thought more than one level deep.
But... I don't say this about every problem. Just ones where this approach seems to be valid. With insolation integrating satellites you can determine the effect of SRM and as for the dosage, obviously insolation levels pre CO2 increases are safe.

Similarly, Everest is factually the same as the other mountains, just higher and harder to access with present infrastructure. So it's a completely reasonable conclusion to say if you can negate the effects of high altitude and build a way to get the tons of equipment in you can solve this problem expensively.

I don't agree that every problem has a straightforward solution. Most problems don't...

And the people arguing with me generally are the ones being more superficial. If you said "well what you didn't know is, the mountains near Everest are festooned with seismic faults", I would listen. That would be an example of actually participating in a discussion. Of you notice, the people arguing will just say "oh it's impossible" with minimal or not justification.

Or speaking of superficial, wolfpup clearly hasn't researched climate mitigation in any serious way. He just claims falsely that IPCC dismisses it and stops thinking about it.

Last edited by SamuelA; 06-10-2019 at 11:18 AM.