The Eternal Load

Discussing all things political in NW Arkansas and beyond.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

There is a fellow named Francis W. Porretto who has a blog called Eternity Road who is a rabid climate change denier. Just terrible stuff.

Image

But he does have a Ph.D (physics) and wrote his dissertation on "gas turbulence." I think he should pull my finger.

He made some comments about global warming on the Big Dog forum and provided a link to an article he wrote on his blog. When I went to his site and responded to his article he censored my comments. Three so far. So he's a big talker except when it comes to defending his stuff, then he's a big walker.

Anyway, I am going to try and make some points and cross post stuff here. He says he very much wants to talk to people who believe in Global Warming but they "just refuse to discuss it in any way." [correction, it was a friend of his who he shared my censored post with who said this]. Since he has censored my every attempt except for one short one complaining about him censoring, I wonder who it really is who isn't up for discussing this issue?

In this article (a new one) he is arguing that we probably can't do anything about Climate Change since it is in "the commons" and no one owns it individually.

***
“Climate Change” And The Tragedy Of The Commons

FRANCIS: "...the sole effective approach to defending a commons that cannot be made into someone's private property, such as the atmosphere, would be the inculcation in all of Mankind of the conviction that that commons is worth defending, even at cost to us as individuals. That conclusion applies uniformly to all sufficiently large commons...but how we might implement the indicated approach is, to say the least, massively unclear.">>

DAR
Is it really unclear? We've done it many times before. A few examples:

When we learned lead in the gasoline was making the kiddies stupid, we banned it.

When we learned the harm of CFC's to the atmosphere, we invented new products and phased out the old.

We require coal plants to scrub their waste even though it pours into "the commons."

There are no end of examples of course.

You note that:

"Some firms are allowed to discharge noxious effluents into certain rivers..."

The fact that there are exceptions, and/or laws are broken, doesn't mean that we shouldn't have these laws or that they aren't overwhelmingly beneficial to our environment by being successful in reducing harm. While it's against the law in most states to burn your garbage, lot's of people still do it (like my republican neighbor) but this doesn't mean great utility doesn't come from it being against the law.

Darrel

Update: Francis censored the above comment and says:

"[FWP: This time around, “Darrel” has chosen to respond off-topic, without addressing any of the substantive points made in the essay. Perhaps he’s a bit slow on the uptake, but I don’t tolerate that here.]
Posted by Darrel (url) on 02/13/2010 at 01:25 AM | Comment#: 11942

***
Ah, one got through the censorship wall....

***
Excellent. You let my third post through, where I finally responded to having two censored.

I will be glad to stick to the topic and be perfectly polite as well (even though all of your material is positively brimming with ad hominem and hatred).

I've slandered no one, that's absurd and you know it.

FRAN: I’m a scientist, and this is a scientific controversy.>>

DAR
Good point. Yes it is. And overwhelming the scientists with knowledge in this field agree with me. With good reason.

FRAN: You won’t be permitted to say anything that derides or demeans others for not holding to your position.">>

DAR
Fine. But of course YOU will do this, constantly, as you do above. What is it about a fair and level playing field that scares you?

FRAN: I am so tired of leftists - and warmistas... refusing to discuss this matter in any way,>>

DAR
What? I would love to talk about this matter. Will I even be *allowed* to? No one has mentioned anything in this thread that I am not very familiar with. I would like to respond. The errors are shiny and quite rudimentary. Let's see if you will allow informed, polite, dissent or will instead hide behind censoring me because you disagree with my positions.

Let's begin.

D.

***

Francis censored my comment (one above the last) and says it was off topic (!). Here is my response:

***
You don't need to put my name in quotation marks, my name is really Darrel.

I responded directly to your main point and gave several counter examples showing why your claim is untenable.

We have many instances of collectively allowing actions, as a society, which we later learned were harmful to "the commons." Rather than foolishly thinking nothing could be done, we proceeded to take action and make the necessary changes.

There is no reason this cannot be don't with climate change.

My response directly addressed your topic. I can think of no reason why you could censor my comments other than you find them too difficult to respond to. It's safe to say you didn't censor it because you have a good response!

Again:

FRANCIS: "...the sole effective approach to defending a commons that cannot be made into someone's private property, such as the atmosphere, would be the inculcation in all of Mankind of the conviction that that commons is worth defending, even at cost to us as individuals. That conclusion applies uniformly to all sufficiently large commons...but how we might implement the indicated approach is, to say the least, massively unclear.">>

DAR
Is it really unclear? We've done it many times before. A few examples:

When we learned lead in the gasoline was making the kiddies stupid, we banned it.

When we learned the harm of CFC's to the atmosphere, we invented new products and phased out the old.

We require coal plants to scrub their waste even though it pours into "the commons."

There are no end of examples of course.

You note that:

"Some firms are allowed to discharge noxious effluents into certain rivers..."

The fact that there are exceptions, and/or laws are broken, doesn't mean that we shouldn't have these laws or that they aren't overwhelmingly beneficial to our environment by being successful in reducing harm. While it's against the law in most states to burn your garbage, lot's of people still do it (like my republican neighbor) but this doesn't mean great utility doesn't come from it being against the law.

D.
------------
Cross posted to our freethinker forum which fearlessly allows intellectual dissent, no exceptions.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

More censorship and cowardice from Francis W. Porretto Ph.D.

****
[FWP: “Darrel” has been back with more nonsense,>>

DAR
You give not a single example.

FRAN: including all the usual unsubstantiated assertions.>>

DAR
Again, you give not a single example. I don't make claims I can't back up. However, you do this, a lot. And this is easy to show. Course, you could always try censoring if someone were to try and point this out.

FRAN: He also attributes to me comments and statements made by commenters here,>>

DAR
You don't give an example. Oh I see, it was a Mr. Goober, who you apparently shared my censored post with. When he respond I thought it was you since my post never appeared and the comments were addressed to me. Why are you so terrified by of dissenting opinion? You might think about that.

FRAN: which indicates that whatever his pretensions, his reading skills are a bit sub-par.>>

DAR
Again with the insults. Your friend "Goober" says he would like to discuss climate change but they "just refuse to discuss it in any way." Well, you have someone who can discuss it knowledgeably and politely, yet, you censor all of my posts.

FRAN: Frankly, I have no more time for his nonsense and will tolerate no more of it. Got me, “Darrel?"]

DAR
Yeah, you're an intellectual coward of the most blatant kind. You like to talk a big game but when someone calls you on your claims, you run away quick and hide behind a skirt of censorship.

I never do that. Ever. It's a good feeling.

All of my posts will be cross posted to our freethinker forum which fearlessly allows intellectual dissent and competition of ideas, no exceptions. And you know, with nearly 16,000 posts, freedom to interact actually works really well for truth.

How's censorship working out for you?

D.
----------------
<a href="viewtopic.php?p=20884#p20884">I've even made a new thread just for you</a>.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

Another one got past Der Fuhrer:

***
[FWP: I’m allowing this one to appear because “Darrel”—sorry, Bubba, you get quote marks until you produce a FULL name that I can verify and apologize on your knees for calling me a coward—is too dim to realize what’s apposite to the arguments made in the post and what isn’t. But that’s typical of left-wing fascists: they can’t argue to the point, so they change the subject, or insult the opponent, or call him a Nazi.

“Darrel,” ol’ buddy, if a Martian were to regard the two of us, he’d conclude that you’re a member of a lesser species. Probably think I kept you as a pet. And before you ask, why do I get to insult you? Because it’s my site and you’ve earned it. Now go play with your left-fascist friends. I’m tired of trying to teach you the difference between fact and opinion, and between logic and mere assertion.] LINK
***

My response:

FRAN: [Insults snipped]

DAR
Oh my, it was all insults. No response to points raised whatsoever. Nothing. And that's unfortunate. If you had good arguments for your beliefs I think you would use those instead of the childish insults and name calling.

Remember, while your insults, smears and personal attacks don't say anything about me, your constant dependence upon them does tell quite a bit about you.

My name is Darrel Henschell.

D.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

Original post

FRAN: "1. A thesis that can't predict is no thesis at all.
A genuine scientist will tell you that knowledge is confirmed by a chain of successful predictions.">>

DAR
I very much agree Francis. And this is precisely what we have today in climate science, a long chain of successful predictions which have been fulfilled in the warming we see today. This happened over the last 15-20 years or so.

For instance, for an in depth look at how Hansen's predictions way back in 1988 turned out <a href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... -1810">see this article written by a climatologist.</a> Error bars and all.

It is because of these predictions coming to pass that we now have such a strong consensus among those trained in this field.

I'll give just three examples:

1) "[A] survey, conducted among researchers listed in the American Geological Institute's Directory of Geoscience Departments*, "found that climatologists who are active in research showed the strongest consensus on the causes of global warming, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role."

<a href="http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0122-clim ... l">LINK</a>

2) "A 2004 article by geologist and historian of science Naomi Oreskes summarized a study of the scientific literature on climate change.[87] The essay concluded that there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. The author analyzed 928 abstracts of papers from refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003,... none of the abstracts disagreed with the consensus position, which the author found to be "remarkable."

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific ... e">Link</a>

That's an extremely strong consensus. But there's more.

3) "All "scientific bod[ies] of national or international standing [agree with] the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change.” --ibid

Notice "all of them." Now it may be that the experts are wrong and you and your associates are right. But I don't think reasonable people will think this is very likely. When speaking outside of your area of expertise, it's good to have the best science on your side and not have all of it going against you.

D.
---------------
"...2009, tied as the second warmest year in the 130 years of global instrumental temperature records, in the surface temperature analysis of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS). The Southern Hemisphere set a record as the warmest year for that half of the world."
<a href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... /">Link</a>.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

Porretto pops his head back into Bigd's forum.

***
Francis W. Porretto says:
Saturday Feb 13th, 2010 at 15:47

No doubt “Darrel” will be along any second now to tell us how bigoted we are for not buying the IPCC’s self-exculpation and committing unconditionally to warmista gospel.

Religious warriors never surrender. They win or die. This will go on until the last warmista runs out of breath.

***
Response:

FRAN: “No doubt “Darrel” will… [insults snipped]“>>

DAR
Francis has nothing but insults. I am a little surprised he has the courage to even come back here and engage me in a forum where he can’t censor the response. Well, he’s just spewing insults, it’s not like he’s actually going to address something substantive. And that’s unfortunate.

I have tried posting substantive responses to some of the extraordinary and completely unreferenced (and rather ludicrous) claims he makes on his site but he has, almost without exception, censored my comments. In an even more interesting act of unfairness and cowardice, he shares my unposted comments with others so they can post and respond to my comments, comments of mine that others can’t even see because he is afraid to allow them to be posted! Simply amazing.

Unlike Porretto, I operate in the open and have nothing to hide. Copies of my attempted posts, <a href="viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6184>can be viewed here.</a>

Porretto, as I said before, I would love to talk about this with you fairly and frankly in an open and at least somewhat fair forum. I floss with pseudo-intellectual blowhards like you. You’re my favorite. You are full of your own “turbulent gas” largely because you isolate your self from informed dissent. This leads to intellectual laziness and mental stagnation. You need a mental rinse, bad.

I offered three locations. I don’t know that Big Dog wants it here. It would be fine, he doesn’t censor. Your place doesn’t seem to work since you find it necessary to play der Fuehrer and censor even the slightest dissenting opinion for what can only be the reason of protecting your fragile ego from the discomfort of having your claims scrutinized (and nuked).

Best would be our freethinker forum. Other than porn spam, we don’t censor at all. What a notion. Pretty scary huh?

You could come and wipe the floor with me on my own turf. Oh the shame! Please do.

Your behavior is not that of a person who is confident of their positions. You talk big and then you run and hide. Are you going to grow a pair and compete and defend your claims or are you going to throw insults and run like a bunny? If you’re actually right, what are you so afraid of?

“…error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.” –Jefferson

D.
————
Again kudos to Bigdog for consistently standing his ground, fighting for his beliefs and freely allowing dissent. I had forgotten how bad and poisonous the censorship of ideas is.
User avatar
kwlyon
Posts: 526
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:59 pm

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by kwlyon »

Try asking him why he is so confrontational regarding an issue of "scientific opinion" in the first place. Geesh...I would like to point out that this behavior, particularly the censoring of dissenting comments, is not considered acceptable among academics. You know I still get a little tinge of pain in my heart every time a catholic says or does something inordinately stupid or unethical. But it does not sting near as much as when a "physicist" resorts to this level of intellectual bullying.

Kevin
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

Link to article

FRAN: "And now, the head of the East Anglia Climatic Research Unit himself has conceded...">>

DAR
Of course you are careful not to actually quote anything he said but instead go with distortions (from an article that also doesn't even quote what he said!). Amazing.

And then it's all rant and vinegar, no substance, again. Maybe you just don't have any real data and facts to defend your positions? Yes, I think that's it. If you ever get some (and the courage to allow and interact with informed dissent), do share. I'd like to see (read: dismantle) it.

D.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

GOOBER: "Darrel, I insist that you either come here with rational argument and try to convince us that we are wrong using facts and knowledge...">>

DAR
I've tried that Goober. Francis has censored all of my posts except two, and one just dealt my complaint about him censoring. He posted that one in isolation because he thought it might make me look bad.

I have cross posted copies of this all here:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6184

I have been debating this topic extensively since 2006. I can do it politely or with a little spice if you like. It matters not to me.

If you wish to talk about this topic you are free to post any comments whatsoever on our freethinker forum. We, don't, censor. Or, you may wish to engage the topic on BigDog's site (he doesn't censor dissenting opinion). This is where I learned of Francis.

http://www.onebigdog.net/

If I may be allowed to address the topics substantively here that would be fine but the Francis has purposely made his censorship of anything with a wiff of non-conformity completely unworkable.

I would very much like to find a GW denier who can speak cogently on the topic. There may be a few here but it seems only those in lockstep agreement are allowed to post. So it is not possible to communicate obviously.

D.

***
JIM: Darrel should try actual debate. That’s what a ‘freethinker’ would do.>>

DAR
Ah, I have posted easily a few thousand pages of debate on our freethinker forum Jim in just the last four years. Much of it on the climate change science and objections. If you look on our actual "things we do" you may notice that number six is:

"Coordinate debates on topics of interest to freethinkers."

<a href="http://fayfreethinkers.com/aboutus.shtml">Link</a>.

I also travel around the nation with our co-founder who has participated in numerous debates. This is all listed on our site.

Darrel.

***

GOOB: "...one would assume that he [Darrel] would value free thought and opinion.>>

DAR
I do. That's why I established a forum that in nearly 16,000 posts has not found it necessary to censor a single post (porn spam excluded).

GOOB: he attacks with insults and denigration and arguments along the lines of “Because SHUT UP, that’s why!”>>

DAR
Please do not put words in my mouth. I have never said anything remotely like that and never would. Ever. Quite the opposite, I am interested in *increasing* conversation and free discussion. Here, my forum, any forum, where ever. What I am firmly against is censoring dissenting opinion, an act in which I have never engaged.

GOOBER: and intolerance for any beliefs that don’t fall into 100% lockstep with mine.">>

DAR
That would be ironic if one were to run their site like that. The fact is, the record shows, we never have.

D.
----------------
ps. I have never called any one here a "liar" (nor have I "slandered" anyone). That is a claim I very rarely make because intent is hard to show.

pps Now perhaps we can talk about climate science? I hope so.

***
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

FRANCIS: "(Of course, he plainly doesn’t know what “censor” means, but I’m not surprised at that....)"

DAR
I've seen those on the right make this point before. Not sure why. It's tempting to differ to their obvious expertise and experience in this area but then there is the brute fact of common usage as referenced in any handy dictionary. Words mean what people commonly use them to mean.

cen⋅sor

–noun
1. an official who examines books, plays, news reports, motion pictures, radio and television programs, letters, cablegrams, etc., for the purpose of suppressing parts deemed objectionable on moral, political, military, or other grounds.

Also:

cen·sor (sěn'sər) n.

1. A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable.

–verb (used with object)
6. to examine and act upon as a censor.
7. to delete (a word or passage of text) in one's capacity as a censor.

<a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/censor">Random House unabridged</a>

You blocked my material because you considered it objectionable. You deleted my text in your capacity as censor. Pretty straightforward.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

More censorship and cowardice from Francis W. Porretto.

***
GOOBER: "That being said, please discuss:">>

DAR
Thank you very VERY much indeed for supplying this most excellent list of questions/concerns for me Mr. Goober. And even numbered for convenience. I appreciate the time spent and promise to go through and give each and every one thoughtful consideration and careful investigation. In fact, I can't wait. But it won't be tonight. I've had a very long day (home at 9pm, tuned 7 pianos) and then even had to chop wood for a while. Now the dear wife says I must to bed. Tomorrow is full again with an evening appointment. And my desktop computer is now kaput with a failed power supply (I am tapping on my laptop). Surely by Friday I can deal with most of them. I will make it a priority.

kind regards,

Darrel
-----------------
free-think-er n.
A person who forms opinions about religion on the basis of reason, independently of tradition, authority, or established belief.
-- Webster's New World Dictionary -- Third College Edition


***
[Thread LOCKED]

DAR
I wonder why Mr. Porretto went against his word in saying I would be able to respond to his thread:

"No, We Haven’t Had Enough “Global Warming” Rants Yet…"

And then he locks the comment section after I tell Goober I will research and respond to his questions.

Does Mr. "Goober" still think that Francis doesn't censor? Does he wonder why he does? I don't.

Darrel
--------------
ps. Francis has repeatedly, falsely, made the charge that I have tried to post comments calling people "liars" here. It's not true. I never have. Not even once. Why would he say this when he knows it isn't true?

***

FRAN: a censor is one who can punish you for saying something he has forbidden.>>

DAR
No, that is one aspect censorship may entail.

FRAN: Being denied comment privileges here is not punishment,>>

DAR
And I never claimed it was. It's censorship. Not all censorship is "punishment." Sometimes censorship is just lack of courage on the part of the censor.

FRAN: when you tell me I’ve posted something that’s “full of falsehoods”—yes, I keep records—you are accusing me of lying.>>

DAR
A charge of falsehood is not a charge of lying. One can post falsehoods without realizing they are false. Learn the difference.

FRAN: "my blogging software locks a post’s comment thread automatically, three days after the post has been activated."

DAR
This is of course a bogus excuse. There are lots of threads here, far older, that are not locked.

I will respond to Goober's points on our forum. And some of yours. I'll put links on Big Dog's site too.

Poor GW deniers, always on the run. You may be the biggest coward I have ever interacted with. Simply amazing. Have you taken Matt 19:12 to heart?

D.
-----------
Attempted response to this thread:

"Where Is the American Media?"
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

Fresh exchange with Francis on the Bigdog site:

***
"Darrel says:
Sunday Feb 28th, 2010 at 21:39

When Porretto speaks about the “guts of a guppy” one should listen. He is speaking about something he has great personal knowledge and intimate experience with. With apologies to guppies (cause they have just a wee bit more intellectual fortitude)." ...

***
Francis W. Porretto says:
Monday Mar 1st, 2010 at 05:44

Okay, hamster dick, you’re on. And you’d better have all your ducks in a row, because this offer expires at 9 PM today, March 1. No excuses will be accepted.

Put together your best defense of global warming theory. You blather quite a lot, so you’d better be ready to produce. If I get it before 9 PM tomight, and if it contains absolutely no insults or imputations of what you call “falsehood” and “censorship,” I’ll post it at Eternity Road as a Guest Post — under your full and correct real-life name. We’ll see what my Co-Conspirators and commenters make of it.

Give it your best shot. We’ll see who’s standing at the end.

LINK

*
Darrel says:
Monday Mar 1st, 2010 at 14:20

FRAN: “…this offer expires at 9 PM today…”>>

DAR
Sorry Porretto, I don’t do deadlines from control freak cowards who have already demonstrated their word means nothing. You have lied to me too many times and the constant censorship you practice at your site is terribly boring and quite counter productive to intellectual exchange. You could learn a bit from Bigd on this. He has the courage to stand and fight for his convictions. You don’t. You use censorship as a tool to hide and run and waste a persons time. It’s pathetic and it’s childish.

If you and your friends would like to step it up to the full adult level and try interacting without a censorship safety net to protect your untenable positions, then post it on our freethinker forum. Or maybe Bigd will post it here. No censorship, no threats, no deadlines followed by locking threads and running away. So I’ll still spank you Francis, here or on my site. I am just not going to waste time on your site when you have shown you don’t keep your word.

Oh, and I will be going through and roasting Goobers 13 points. I want to make an example of it and do a really good job. I’ve got a good start on it (I spend a couple hours doing some background reading on #1) but then you locked the thread and wouldn’t let me respond after you said you would. This was discouraging and because of your censorship and cowardice this project got bumped to the very end of the line of my “to do” list.

I will be posting it on our freethinker forum where there is nary a threat of some power monkey wasting my time with locking threads and shutting down discourse because of fear of a dissenting opinion. I’ll be sure and send you a note when I do. Maybe you can let “Goober” know? That would be great. I would appreciate it. Thanks in advance.

Darrel Henschell.
———————-
ps. Isn’t it cute how Porretto constantly complains about insults while most of his posts contain nothing but insults? There’s a word for that. Starts with an “h.”

LINK
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:05 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville, AR
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Doug »

Darrel wrote:ps. Isn’t it cute how Porretto constantly complains about insults while most of his posts contain nothing but insults? There’s a word for that. Starts with an “h.”
DOUG
"Hamster balls"? Oh, that's two words...
"We could have done something important Max. We could have fought child abuse or Republicans!" --Oona Hart (played by Victoria Foyt), in the 1995 movie "Last Summer in the Hamptons."
User avatar
kwlyon
Posts: 526
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:59 pm

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by kwlyon »

Doug wrote:
Darrel wrote:ps. Isn’t it cute how Porretto constantly complains about insults while most of his posts contain nothing but insults? There’s a word for that. Starts with an “h.”
DOUG
"Hamster balls"? Oh, that's two words...
I think you mean hippogriff....But what do Eagle Headed flying horses have to do with this?....oh....horseshit....falling from the sky....yeah.....
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

Posted on Porretto's site. He'll probably censored it, but a copy shall remain here:

Permalink

***
FRAN: "The greenhouse effect is a laboratory phenomenon...">>

DAR
"The greenhouse effect was discovered by Joseph Fourier in 1824, first reliably experimented on by John Tyndall in 1858, and first reported quantitatively by Svante Arrhenius in 1896." LINK

Reasonable people will understand that we've learned a bit more about the greenhouse effect, on this planet and others, in the 114 years since then. Quite a bit of it outside the laboratory.

FRAN: "highly controversial mechanism, whose power is not yet established">>

DAR
The power of the greenhouse effect is not yet established?

FRAN: "enormous political contest over whether domestic American oil exploration, extraction, and refinement should increase.">>

DAR
No there isn't. Increase it or not. It's irrelevant. We have about 2% of the oil, we burn about 25% of the oil. This is not difficult math.

***
"Drill more wells? In 1972 we had 508,000 pumping wells. Many of those wells have dried up or become uneconomical to operate, but despite that, in 2004 about 510,000 wells were pumping oil. We're drilling about as many new wells as we can, both technologically and economically. The problem is the average volume per well - down from almost 19 barrels per well per day in 1972 to about 10.5 barrels per well per day in 2004. The same number of wells pumps only about half the oil of 30 years ago. You can't make a 10-barrel-a-day well pump 1,000 barrels, no matter what you do."

--http://www.gravmag.com/oilessay.html

Also note:

"SO WE'LL JUST FIND MORE OIL,... Right?
The last large discovery of oil on the planet occurred more than 30 years ago, and virtually the entire globe has been searched to find additional deposits. 80% of oil being produced today is from fields discovered prior to 1973. These fields are now in terminal decline. In the 1990's oil discoveries averaged about seven billion barrels of oil a year, only one third of what was being consumed. The discovery rate of multi-billion barrel fields has been declining since the 1940's, and that of large (500-million barrel) fields since the 1960's. In 1938, fields with more than 10 million barrels made up 19% of all new discoveries, but by 1948 the proportion had dropped to only 3%. The average reserves of oil field discoveries today is less than ten million barrels of recoverable oil; and ten million barrels will meet less than half a day's oil demand for the United States alone. So to just fulfill U.S. oil consumption the world would need to discover more than 750 of these new fields, each year, to replenish what was consumed in the previous year, not to mention still more discoveries to compensate for existing wells that become exhausted, and to fulfill the anticipated 2-3% increase in demand each year.
The ratio of oil consumed to oil discovered each year is now about six to one: 30 billion barrels consumed, to only five billion barrels discovered.”

Worldwide, total new oil discovered during the year [2005] comes to 4.5 billion barrels -- a 53-day supply at current rates of consumption. New discoveries in 2004 and 2005 were the lowest recorded since World War II."

You might educate yourself about the world's oil situation before you speak about such things. I have put together a handy primer on this issue here:

Link
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

Francis censored my above comment but he let's adoring comments through.

Sent this along tonight:

***
Are you afraid to post my response Francis?

I post copies here of course:

viewtopic.php?p=21193#p21193

I've never known someone to be so afraid of a few dissenting words. They're just words. Surely your readers could handle a little bit of polite yet differing opinion that doesn't always goose step in the same direction? Perhaps you know them better than I. Maybe my comments should be censored to protect them (but mostly to protect you from the discomfort of being corrected).

D.

Permalink


***
Francis sent me a note:
***
--- On Tue, 3/30/10, Francis W. Porretto
Subject: Your comments at Eternity Road
Date: Tuesday, March 30, 2010, 3:28 AM

FRAN
You've dropped enough slander>>

DAR
Of course I haven't dropped any. None at all. Don't confuse reasoned and referenced argument, with slander (just because they both may cause you discomfort).

FRAN
and absolute nonsense,>>

DAR
I know you don't agree with my points but you really shouldn't be so afraid of addressing or even allowing them. That's intellectual cowardice.

FRAN
and displayed a deep enough lack of reading ability,>>

DAR
I've demonstrated this with you, yet unlike you, I gave examples.

FRAN
to make it to my auto-delete list. That's why your comments don't -- and won't -- appear.>>

DAR
My comments don't appear because you are afraid of honest, non-abusive intellectual exchange. You only want to hear from people that agree with you and kiss your feet. And you want to be insulting 100% of the time. It's a bit much. You don't do behave this way because you have good arguments for your beliefs.

You, and your ideas, cannot compete on a free and fair forum.

Just hoping some day to find a right winger who will stand up for what he believes in and can keep up. This person is not you apparently.

D.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

More Porretto roast:

***
#
Francis W. Porretto says:
Thursday Apr 1st, 2010 at 16:27

You are pretty much a slander-slinging, government-worshipping coward. And a hamster-dick.

***
Darrel says:
Thursday Apr 1st, 2010 at 17:27

FRAN: “You are [insults snipped].”>>

DAR
Francis is clearly practicing the psychological phenomenon of projection:

pro·jec·tion
   
Psychology.
a.
the tendency to ascribe to another person feelings, thoughts, or attitudes present in oneself, or to regard external reality as embodying such feelings, thoughts, etc., in some way.

Dictionary.com

I never call him names but he feels the need to do this constantly. Maybe when he gets old and wise he’ll learn that his insults say nothing about me but they do reveal quite a bit about him.

Once again I will point out that the record shows clearly, as preserved here for all time, (in a forum that does not censor dissenting opinion), Francis W. Porretto, is a Flaming Intellectual Coward.

Why do point out Porretto’s errors? He talks a big game but he won’t stand up for his beliefs. He runs and hides behind censorship and insults. I don’t like cowards. If you want to hold silly untenable beliefs in the comfort of you home, that’s great. If you want to spout outrageous nonsense in public and pretend to allow public comment, then best be ready to defend them, not run and hide and censor when your beliefs can so easily be shown to be indefensible.

D.

http://www.onebigdog.net/the-plan-for-i ... ent-150925
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:05 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville, AR
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Doug »

Darrel wrote: Francis W. Porretto says:
You are pretty much a slander-slinging, government-worshipping coward. And a hamster-dick.
DAR
Francis is clearly practicing the psychological phenomenon of projection:
...the tendency to ascribe to another person feelings, thoughts, or attitudes present in oneself, or to regard external reality as embodying such feelings, thoughts, etc., in some way.
DOUG
So Porretto thinks of himself as a hamster-dick? What exactly is a "hamster-dick"? Is it someone whose penis is the size of the average-sized penis of a hamster, or is it someone whose penis is the size of the average hamster itself?
"We could have done something important Max. We could have fought child abuse or Republicans!" --Oona Hart (played by Victoria Foyt), in the 1995 movie "Last Summer in the Hamptons."
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

This is precious. This yellow bellied blow hard Porretto, who doesn't hold an intellectual idea he won't run from defending and is too much of a coward to let anyone with a dissenting opinion post anything on his site, just posted this bluster:
"Time was, America was understood to be founded on a clear, simple understanding of the manly virtues. A genuine man doesn't bend the knee to any sort of bullying. He doesn't concede for the sake of being liked; he doesn't imagine that his moral standing requires that he surrender preemptively. He doubles his fists and shouts, "All right, bring it on. We'll see who's standing at the end of this."

Your Curmudgeon has feared for some time that the manly ethic was irretrievably lost. A few have always displayed it, and a few display it today, but their number seems pathetically small: far too few to germinate a renascence of actual moral courage. Yet moral courage is the only thing that can withstand an onslaught of bullying. The great mass of men will only follow demonstrated courage.

Either we grow spines in sufficient quantity, and sufficient stiffness, to reverse the trend and put the bullies in their place, or America as we've loved it is doomed."

Link
Porretto, talking about spine, and courage! That's some good stuff.
User avatar
Betsy
Posts: 800
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 11:02 am

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Betsy »

That man is clearly delusional. You'll never be able to get through to him, and anyone who buys into his schtick...well. Perhaps you should stop casting your pearls before such swine and find people with the ability to read and learn to spend your time and effort on.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: The Eternal Load

Post by Dardedar »

Perhaps you should stop casting your pearls before such swine and find people with the ability to read and learn to spend your time and effort on.
DAR
Well I hadn't popped by his site in weeks. Took a look last night and thought that quote was funny.

Where are these people you speak of? You make a good point tho... I tend to get caught up with the nutcases. Maybe they remind me of my JW relatives.
Post Reply