Him: What’s your goal? Do you wish to prove, that the Global Warming thing is an empty problem, or what?

Me: No, I don’t care whether it will be a degree hotter in the year 2100 or not, I really don’t.

Him: What then? Do you want to be smarter than the whole scientific community on this question?

Me: Oh yes, this is already something, of course I like this idea. Once upon a time I also believed that the so called GHGs can contribute to higher temperatures. Then I realized that this can’t be true and now I want to signal to everybody that I am aware of this error. But this is also not the most important issue, by far.

Him: What then?

Me: The real and important question for me is whether or not a human mind is powerful enough to deduce the existence of Moon’s molten core with only the knowledge from 1950. 

Me: It turns out that is’s possible! And not only that, but the existence of “hot jupiters” around other stars was possible to deduce from the knowledge from the 1950. The question is if anybody actually deduced all that and maybe even more. However, it is possible to do that and this is of utmost importance. It is a consequence of already back then known physics; just apply you intelligence to the topic and you’ll see.

Me: It is all an epistemological and methodological issue, of how much you can deduce from only a very scarce amount of information. Those “warmists” were just at the wrong place at the wrong time, so I must have a quarrel with this guys. 

Me: You see, this is a very interesting topic. Galileo and others who followed him, and also some who preceded him, have deduced a whole bunch about outer space  just by seating here on Earth, pondering about the skies.

Him: Arrhenius also deduced that the Venus is hot, don’t exclude him now, just because he is not in accordance with you!

Me: He deduced it wrongly. As a matter of fact, others deduced wrongly using his ideas. Many were wrong in the past, many are wrong even now.

Him: But not you, right?

Me: Not here, not now. But as I’ve said, I am after the method, how to deduce a lot from a little and I am just thrilled by how much can be done here. Space is just one example.

Him: I am once again astonished at how you love symbols and syntax and neglect everything else. You don’t care for Nature, just for abstractions!

Me: With those “abstractions” we could fix Nature.

Him: Here you go again – machine intelligence will save us, yes? 

Me: Maybe it will, maybe it will not. But there is a great potential here in inferring, where no one has inferred before.

Him: Especially where nobody has ever used a tractor yet?

Me: Inferring tractors, right.

Him: Hohoho … that CAN’T be done, when will you understand that?

Me: Oh dear … 






2 thoughts on “Debating

  1. I don’t know if it’s just me or if everybody else encountering problems with your website.
    It appears as if some of the written text in your content are running off the screen. Can someone else please
    comment and let me know if this is happening to them too?

    This could be a problem with my web browser because I’ve had this happen previously.

    • Should work, just as WordPress works. Should be just fine.

      But Wordprees might hear this (and other discussions about such problems) and might fix if something isn’t quite right on his part.

      I have no power over the form, only over the content. I hope you enjoy it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s