Houston..

[Red]

The first post asked that question sarcastically. But that's neither here nor there. I was annoyed that you're giving a fake poster so much attention, but I probably shouldn't have singled you out. Nonetheless, Boris is a fake poster, and not simply a troll. He started posting a couple of years ago as a Russian (thus the name Boris), with a fake Russian accent and all, and a thorough knowledge of every poster on this forum. He then changed his character a few times. I think he's a black kid from Baltimore now or something? I've had him on ignore for a while, so I'm not sure.

You can do whatever you wish. Maybe you think there's value to what you're saying even if the person you're arguing with is insincere. But you should know that he IS insincere. He is wasting your time on purpose for his personal entertainment.

Yeah, I thought there was value, but then again, maybe there really isn't. I am naive. But I'll remember in the future.

 

[Gameface]

PearlWatson? That makes sense I guess.

I looked at the member list earlier today, sorted by join date, and it only shows members with 10 or more posts. Page one is 30 names long, and the last one is OVER a year old, and one of them is you, obviously NOT a new poster. Trolls drive people out.

Are you calling me a troll?

I am the poster formerly known as Gameface. This is not a secret.

I feel I've been a valuable member of this online community. I've had probably more than 30 Jazzfanz members over to my house over the years of hosting poker games. I've been involved in pretty much every mini-meetup there has been. I've gone to Jazz games with several people.

I'm not some anonymous poster trying to get everyone riled up for the sake of agitating them. My name is Jared Brigham Young. I act like myself here, for better or worse.

 

[Siro]

Are you calling me a troll?

I am the poster formerly known as Gameface. This is not a secret.

I feel I've been a valuable member of this online community. I've had probably more than 30 Jazzfanz members over to my house over the years of hosting poker games. I've been involved in pretty much every mini-meetup there has been. I've gone to Jazz games with several people.

I'm not some anonymous poster trying to get everyone riled up for the sake of agitating them. My name is Jared Brigham Young. I act like myself here, for better or worse.

I don't wanna speak for him, but I think you misunderstood. I took his comment to mean that the destruction of the forums is discouraging new members from joining, given that we've had fewer than 30 new members in an entire year, and one of those is you (so some of those aren't even actual new members).

 

[Gameface]

I don't wanna speak for him, but I think you misunderstood. I took his comment to mean that the destruction of the forums is discouraging new members from joining, given that we've had fewer than 30 new members in an entire year, and one of those is you (so some of those aren't even actual new members).

ahh

 

[Jonah]

Yeah, I thought there was value, but then again, maybe there really isn't. I am naive. But I'll remember in the future.

There is value in posting useful links and thoughtful points of view, but I think the best way to respond to trolls is to never quote them directly. When they post misinformation you feel should not go unanswered, simply post with the reply to thread button, and the viewpoint you wish to present can be read without ever engaging the troll. If context is necessary it can be done by paraphrasing or restating the issue. The trolls in question could often use a translation into coherent English anyway.

 

[Red]

There is value in posting useful links and thoughtful points of view, but I think the best way to respond to trolls is to never quote them directly. When they post misinformation you feel should not go unanswered, simply post with the reply to thread button, and the viewpoint you wish to present can be read without ever engaging the troll. If context is necessary it can be done by paraphrasing or restating the issue. The trolls in question could often use a translation into coherent English anyway.

Thanks. I've approached it both ways, in fact. As often as not, I've ignored replies directed to me and just carried on as if those replies didn't exist. I've even been ignorant about it at times

 

[JazzMan4Life]

As a 'new' poster (I've lurked here over a decade) I wouldn't mind a "Who's a Troll" thread. I've said it before but it's tough to differentiate between the trolls and the morons/douches.

 

[colton]

lols


you do know scientist from the 1400 used that same **** right.

"scientist" always think this time they got it right!!!!!!!!!!!!!



you knwo when they get it right and i will believe them

if in 30 years they did not change their ****. and their **** came true!!



this time we got it right is ********. ok if you got it right we can stop sicence, grab a drink go to some hookers and get drunk!


only retarded people are so naive that we got it right this time!

Yes, the state of science in 2017 is just like it was in the year 1400. Your logic is impeccable. /sarcasm

But back to the question that I've asked twice, that you still haven't answered--what resource(s) do you use to inform yourself about climate science? Whose opinion DO you trust? Why do you believe what you believe? What evidence have you found to be persuasive? And why do you trust that particular evidence and disregard the thousands of other pieces of evidence that argue in favor of climate change?

Basically, your arguments and explanations have been like this so far: "I don't believe because I don't believe." That's not how science works, and it's not how logical critiques of science work either.

 

[babe]

I like Boris.

Whatever else you say about him, he speaks for about 55% of Americans and 60% of people worldwide.

ya'll have read stuff to come up with opinions manufactured for public consumption in the New York Times, other yellow rags, and corporate media. Most people don't listen to their teachers in school, or pay attention to the propaganda worked into Hollywood movies and stuff.

By the time the average, normal person has seen two seasons of Big Bird or Barney, they're done with the whole standard world views. Well, unless you really believe what you're told, which takes a peculiar kind of mentality hell bent on making the world nice and progressive.

 

[babe]

Yes, the state of science in 2017 is just like it was in the year 1400. Your logic is impeccable. /sarcasm

But back to the question that I've asked twice, that you still haven't answered--what resource(s) do you use to inform yourself about climate science? Whose opinion DO you trust? Why do you believe what you believe? What evidence have you found to be persuasive? And why do you trust that particular evidence and disregard the thousands of other pieces of evidence that argue in favor of climate change?

Basically, your arguments and explanations have been like this so far: "I don't believe because I don't believe." That's not how science works, and it's not how logical critiques of science work either.

No, the argument is "To Hell with you. I get to think what I want to think."

 

[Red]

No, the argument is "To Hell with you. I get to think what I want to think."

For several days now, I've been thinking of starting a thread about novelist and one time journalist Kurt Andersens's new book "Fantasyland: How America Went Haywire: a 500 year History". and now, here you are, in a few words, summarizing part of his thesis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15ovRt5IW6Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMnLS0RZ-HM&app=desktop

 

[LogGrad98]

Truth is somewhat nebulous. Facts are generally more certain, however they can be (and are of course) used, misconstrued, and interpreted, to construct various versions of "the truth". Especially in a day and age when everything that floats around in someone's head can become a world-wide sensation, when there are so many sources of information that it generates serious information overload, it is tough to ascertain the actual facts, let alone distill that down into something resembling truth, especially for people who get most of their information from individual pictures, memes, and 30 second videos on facebook. Everything tends to be taken at face value. That scares the hell out of me, tbh.