SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > General > General Topics
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-25-23, 05:26 PM   #31
Rockstar
In the Brig
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 12,575
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

You expect me to believe that in one sentence you explained a lot about earth's climate history, really? What does August, tree rings, fox news have to do what I wrote? All I did was attempt to share my understanding of the difference between global temperature average and temperature anomaly and why I think temperature averages have increased and that the end of year arguments of warming are actually over temperature anomalies? I also shared other news I found about scientific papers which discuss in some detail theories of how natural planetary forces may affect our climate. One of which is geo thermal venting that is said to be affecting arctic ice & Greenland ice caps from the bottom up as well as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation as we speak.

Then you come right and without explanation decree lies lies! Running down the road rambling on about fox news, trolls and august, wth?

Last edited by Rockstar; 01-25-23 at 05:37 PM.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-23, 05:43 PM   #32
Catfish
Dipped Squirrel Operative
 
Catfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky
Posts: 17,032
Downloads: 38
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapuc View Post
Thinking for our self.
Are we truly thinking for our self or are we thinking what others want us to think ?
There is always the 'danger' to fall for some.. entity's opinion because it seems logical (or because it suits your opinion or political prejudice ) The only remedy is to get information based on facts and empiricism, and to draw your conclusions.
Quote:
Secondly WHO of us has a degree in climatology ? I for one doesn't
Climatology, well. There was a time and there are nations who do not study this. Do not ask me why there are people in nations that do, still prefer to believe in other (like populistic) explanations. Must be a "human" thing
Yes we had climatology in our studies, but this means nothing. Theories change all the time.
Quote:
When it comes to this claim about climate change-I have decided not to believe any of them--Heck I have my own theory..and I seems to be to only one with this theory..I can't post an article to tell you I'm right, 'cause there isn't any.
Right. Well you could present it here, no one will support or criticize it without trying to give evidence for or against it. Discussion is the best way to find the truth, and make you think.
__________________


>^..^<*)))>{ All generalizations are wrong.
Catfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-23, 05:59 PM   #33
Catfish
Dipped Squirrel Operative
 
Catfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky
Posts: 17,032
Downloads: 38
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockstar View Post
You expect me to believe that in one sentence you explained a lot about earth's climate history, really?
Not in one sentence, no. Short-term changes in weather like one warm or cold summer (or winter) does not represent a decade or century-long trend of a changing climate.
Quote:
All I did was attempt to share my understanding of the difference between global temperature average and temperature anomaly and why I think temperature averages have increased and that the end of year arguments of warming are actually over temperature anomalies?
You are right, isolated occurrences do not represent a general climate change. But the decade-long melting of glaciers does show a trend.
It is not that this has not happened before, but the very short time interval in which it happens now is breathtaking. We see it happening in decades when it took ten-thousand years, or even millions of it (like the permian climate change and extinction).

You did not share a link of the news where this is discussed or then I still have not found it –
Yes, planetary forces, the earth's magnetic field, even "thermal exhalations" or volcanic eruptions can (and have!) influenced weather and climate of any planet, there are also cyclic changes. This has - afaik - not much to do with what we see now.
__________________


>^..^<*)))>{ All generalizations are wrong.
Catfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-23, 06:04 PM   #34
August
Wayfaring Stranger
 
August's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 22,936
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapuc View Post
When it comes to this claim about climate change-I have decided not to believe any of them--Heck I have my own theory..and I seems to be to only one with this theory..I can't post an article to tell you I'm right, 'cause there isn't any.

Markus

I'd be interested to hear your theory Markus. While I may not agree i certainly wouldn't belittle or judge you for it.
__________________


Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see.
August is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-23, 06:08 PM   #35
mapuc
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Denmark
Posts: 19,574
Downloads: 37
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catfish View Post
Right. Well you could present it here, no one will support or criticize it without trying to give evidence for or against it. Discussion is the best way to find the truth, and make you think.
Let me start with the fact. The battle to decrease the CO2 emission to almost zero will not help a tiny bit

It's earth who has decided to either erase the entire human race or a majority of it.

We are like a virus on Mother earths soil.

To fight a virus the body raise its temp.(that's why people has fever when they fight some virus in their body) This is what mother earth is doing raising the temp. to fight its virus(us) Earth is only a few hours old in the history of the universe and she has all the time to slowly raise the temp.

So you see all this talk about getting the CO2 emission down to almost zero will have no effect.

I've read things like it's important that we change our behaviour, well well this should have been done thousands of years ago.

Markus
__________________

My little lovely female cat
mapuc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-23, 07:04 PM   #36
Rockstar
In the Brig
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 12,575
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Catfish View Post
Not in one sentence, no. Short-term changes in weather like one warm or cold summer (or winter) does not represent a decade or century-long trend of a changing climate.

You are right, isolated occurrences do not represent a general climate change. But the decade-long melting of glaciers does show a trend.
It is not that this has not happened before, but the very short time interval in which it happens now is breathtaking. We see it happening in decades when it took ten-thousand years, or even millions of it (like the permian climate change and extinction).

You did not share a link of the news where this is discussed or then I still have not found it –
Yes, planetary forces, the earth's magnetic field, even "thermal exhalations" or volcanic eruptions can (and have!) influenced weather and climate of any planet, there are also cyclic changes. This has - afaik - not much to do with what we see now.

I couldn’t find the paper about the Pacific currents warming it was so easy to find just a few months ago. However I did find a study about the Atlanticfication of arctic water which proposes the Arctic has been on a warming trend long before measuring instruments were even invented. They also add there is plenty of controversy regarding this theory and AGW theory.
Quote:
Controversy still remains on the relative impact of natural versus anthropogenic forcing on the North Atlantic system. However, it seems likely that the slowdown of the AMOC during the early 20th century has been caused primarily by increased export of Arctic sea ice and freshwater in the North-East Atlantic following the end of the LIA (Last Ice Area)
Hurry up, read IT, copy it, download it, whatever before that disappears from the intardnet too.

Yes the isolated possibility of removing a weather station from a cold climate are of the planet will affect the global temperature average. But don’t forget I also add my arguement there is an obvious correlation between the establishment of new weather station around the globe in the last few decade and the so-called “breathtaking” rise in global temperature average.

Last edited by Rockstar; 01-25-23 at 07:33 PM. Reason: To irritate Dowly
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-23, 07:05 PM   #37
August
Wayfaring Stranger
 
August's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 22,936
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapuc View Post
Let me start with the fact. The battle to decrease the CO2 emission to almost zero will not help a tiny bit

It's earth who has decided to either erase the entire human race or a majority of it.

We are like a virus on Mother earths soil.

To fight a virus the body raise its temp.(that's why people has fever when they fight some virus in their body) This is what mother earth is doing raising the temp. to fight its virus(us) Earth is only a few hours old in the history of the universe and she has all the time to slowly raise the temp.

So you see all this talk about getting the CO2 emission down to almost zero will have no effect.

I've read things like it's important that we change our behaviour, well well this should have been done thousands of years ago.

Markus

Not sure that I agree with the idea that nature has a conscious will but the end result can certainly be the same. IMO it all comes down to our numbers.

We're on track to hit 9 Billion people on this planet very soon, far more than we have ever had. With those ever climbing numbers in an increasingly electrified and mobilized world we won't ever reduce our CO2 emissions down to almost zero no matter how efficient we become. 9 billion people will still continue to breathe, will still continue to eat, our livestock will still fart and our crop fields will still replace our forests and prairies.

All that I think will happen is the governments will continue to pander to climate changes whether they are natural or man made in order to increase it's power over our lives by issuing ever more more intrusive, unrealistic and expensive mandates until the population simply finds it impossible to support or afford it any further.

Then society will descend into chaos and war and human population numbers will crash as a result. Nature will equalize upon a new balance that reflects the how and why of how it all went down and we humans will reorganize into new societies that will eventually crumble for whatever the proverbial camel straw it was that causes their demise and the process will be repeated.

At least until something happens that wipes us ALL out. That one might be tough to recover from for our even our most resourceful species.
__________________


Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see.

Last edited by August; 01-25-23 at 07:07 PM. Reason: to irritate Dowly
August is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-23, 07:18 PM   #38
Rockstar
In the Brig
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 12,575
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

I’m getting closer they are called ‘mantle plumes’. Still trying to find the one which suggest they are occurring in the Pacific and affecting the PDO and Arctic from the bottom up.. It’s out there somewhere.

https://phys.org/news/2020-12-newly-...al-arctic.html

Last edited by Rockstar; 01-25-23 at 08:07 PM. Reason: to irritate Dowly
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-23, 07:45 PM   #39
Rockstar
In the Brig
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 12,575
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by August View Post
At least until something happens that wipes us ALL out. That one might be tough to recover from for our even our most resourceful species.
Our history began when we started writing it. There are some which suggest why the earliest known record of human writing only goes back to around 3500 B.C. Because those who wrote it were able to survive a global catastrophe which obliterated everything before it. I laugh when I think about how they probably blamed themselves too. Just read Genesis, it wasn’t because of a meteor it was because we sinned! It was our fault!

https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/ev...ry?id=17884533

I think about AGW as a possibility but I tend not to get too worked up over it, pretty much for the sole reason politicians and media are way too heavily involved. It’s why I tend to lean towards the idea its nature taking its course

Last edited by Rockstar; 01-25-23 at 08:09 PM. Reason: to irritate Dowly
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-23, 11:57 PM   #40
Ostfriese
The Old Man
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Northern Germany
Posts: 1,311
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapuc View Post
Secondly WHO of us has a degree in climatology ?
Would a degree in chemistry be a sufficient alternative in your opinion?

----

Watching scientific illiterates explaining "science" was funny for a short while a long time ago, but nowadays it's way too common, and way too many people are serious about the stupid things they claim to be science, about htings they believe in but haven't even understood on the most basic level (some postings in this thread fit perfectly into this scheme).

Whenever you believe the lowest level of stupidity has been reached some idiot pulls out an excavator just to dig an even deeper hole, more often enough accompanied by "It's a conspiracy" - "The government *blah blah blah*" - "The bible says..." - "Do your own research" - "There's a study/article here that says..."

I've experienced exactly this sort of bs for my entire work life, and the internet has made it far worse. The "do your own reserach" crowd has yet to produce a single individual who understands even the most basic scitentific principle and apply it correctly. Dunning-Kruger all around, and it's not just the flat earthers.

I even had the case of one of this "do your own research"-idiots telling me I wasn't able to understand a certain topic, and he linked three scientific papers with the aforementioned "do your own research" in tow - yes, you fool, I did, two of the papers were my own, for the third I was co-author.
Ostfriese is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-23, 04:21 AM   #41
Dowly
Lucky Jack
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 25,035
Downloads: 32
Uploads: 0


Default

@Rockstar RE: Temperature measurements

I think it helps if you look at it at a smaller scale. Global temperatures are collected from hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of individual weather stations that take temperature measurements, usually daily. From these individual data sets, you start to build a bigger picture, first a local area then moving to wider region before somewhere down the line you pool it all together as global temperature. This data should be available from your local weather stations, so you could even download it and plonk it all in to excel and see how temperatures in your area have changed over time. (I just did, it was pretty cool!)

As for new methods and equipment, yes of course there will be difference between new and old. That's where calibration comes into play; you don't just switch off the old equipment, you keep it on and compare that data with the new data and adjust as needed. If you have the old equipment running parallel with the new one for a year and see that there's a difference of 0.1C between the two, you know how to adjust the old temperatures to match the new data from the new equipment. I am assuming the 30 year average is constantly running, so as years go by the data gets newer and newer with old temperatures dropping off from the other end.

Global temperature measurements are also not only tied to ground/sea based measurements, satellites keep track of temperatures as well and can be used to corroborate the data gathered from ground based stations.


As for your claim that there is no proof of how CO2 interacts with the atmosphere. That's just not true. Just like every other known gas on Earth, CO2's properties are well known and have been studied for over a century.
One could even do their own experiment to see how CO2 interacts with the sun (or a powerful light). Take two clear containers, one with air and one with CO2 added to the mix. Point a powerful light towards them or have them sit in the sun and use something to measure the temperature inside the two containers. After a while, you will see that the temperature inside the container with added CO2 will show warmer temperatures.

Last edited by Dowly; 01-26-23 at 06:09 AM. Reason: to irritate myself
Dowly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-23, 12:15 PM   #42
Rockstar
In the Brig
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 12,575
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

I do agree the globe is warming, but as one physicist/geophysicist said: “

“While I do not know what precisely (though I know a little) causes Global Warming, I do know what does not cause it. CO2 and other greenhouse gases, anthropogenic or otherwise, are merely passive players that, like the GTA (Global Temperature Anomaly), are driven by other more dynamic forces associated with Earth’s core, the Sun, and even the Cosmos (referring to the Danish theory of cloud formation), all of which act, react, and interact in a very complex manner.

Note that the IPCC concentrates on Solar Irradiance, but ignores other solar energies such as that associated with Solar Magnetic Flux that has more than doubled since 1900. Gravity is another player in the Global Warming picture. Also note that Mars has global warming comparable to Earth’s without CO2 (Fenton, et. al., Nature, 2008). There are no Martians to either generate or enhance CO2 on Mars.”

I mean if conclusive evidence is in that CO2 is the cause, why are learned people still saying such things?

Then there are Ne'er Do Wells like myself that still find studies showing other forces of nature mantle plumes or so-called heat bombs melting the both polar ice caps Greenland ice from the bottom up?


If people want to blame themselves for something let them take responsibility for the 7 millions deaths THEY cause each year from air pollution they generate. And the misery and death THEY cause by demanding the others dig up Cobalt in the Congo so they can have their precious cell phones. Take responsibility for that. The idea people proclaim they can save a planet when they can’t even care for their fellow human is conceited fantasy.

The planet Earth has changed, is changing and will change, it’s is gonna warm or cool as it has throughout its’ history with or without man and or his CO2.

Last edited by Rockstar; 01-26-23 at 01:55 PM.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-23, 04:39 AM   #43
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 41,432
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

Another perspective.


Note on the following text: "Lützerath" is a recently forcibly evicted village in Germany that falls victim to lignite mining, Luisa Neubauer is a German Greta Thunberg.
Focus writes:
----------------------------------------------------
Climate rescue? All well and good, but the real agenda of the activists is different

What is the climate movement about? The climate? You would think. Until you start looking into the real goals in more detail.

Do you know what a Leopard-2 consumes in fuel? 720 liters of diesel per hundred kilometers. Tanks are not only a disaster in terms of peace ethics, they are also climate killers. Every leopard is a Lützerath on tracks. I'm surprised that the climate movement hasn't discovered this issue and is pushing for a swift end to the war.

But wait. That's exactly what it says in an essay under the heading "Climate Killer War" in the "Journal for International Politics and Society," the foreign policy magazine of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, the party foundation of the SPD.

"Bombardments on fossil infrastructure leave behind a mixture of various toxic substances that cause serious environmental damage," it says. "At the same time, raw materials and resources are being invested by all warring parties in armaments that would be needed to deal with the climate crisis." There is only one thing that can help: a ceasefire immediately! Only with a ceasefire can the 1.5-degree target still be achieved, the conclusion goes.

Sure, this is bitter news for all Ukrainians. A ceasefire means accommodating Putin. Without far-reaching concessions, he will hardly agree to recall his troops to save the 1.5-degree target. But climate change threatens not only Ukraine, but all of humanity. Forty-three million versus eight billion: That's the trade-off. Sorry, dear Ukraine.

It was only a matter of time before pacifism and the environmental movement came together. That's the great thing about climate, it fits in with everything that's politically en vogue at the moment. Anti-colonialism, anti-capitalism, anti-Semitism: if you look closely, there's no left-wing issue that can't be given a new lease of life this way.

Most people think that groups like "Fridays for Future" or "Last Generation" are about stopping climate change. That's the appeal of the movement. These desperate young people, it is said everywhere, are only fighting so that they also have a livelihood. Even the most hardened cynic gets weak in the knees when it comes to the future of the children.

But is the climate movement really about the climate? I now have my doubts. If I were a climate activist, my main concern would be how to keep our economic system running without driving the planet's temperature ever higher.

The fantastic thing is that, with nuclear power, mankind has an energy source that is reliable, sufficiently available and climate-neutral. If the activists were solely concerned with the climate, one would think they would be interested in anything that might offer a way out. But it isn't. There is not even a discussion of reassessing nuclear power. The only thing there is is a demand to shut down everything that is considered too dirty.

I came across a video clip by chance featuring entrepreneur and book author Vivek Ramaswamy. Ramaswamy made a bunch of money in medical technology before he started writing. His book, Woke, Inc. i.e., about woken capitalism, was on the New York Times bestseller list for months.

The real goal of the climate movement is to get the West to apologize for past sins in order to finally achieve global justice, Ramaswamy says in the video excerpt. Hence the reluctance to embrace nuclear power. The problem with nuclear power, he says, is not that it has disappointed the expectations placed in it. The problem is that it is too good. The moment clean energy is available in large quantities, there is no more leverage to push the anti-Western agenda.

Admittedly, that sounds a bit far-fetched. But talk to climate activists for a while and it occurs to you that maybe Ramaswamy isn't so off base after all.

Did you know that the fight for the 1.5-degree target will be decided next to Luetzerath in Ramallah? Why is that, you may now ask. Because the fight against climate change can only be won if the Palestinian flag flies everywhere where Israel is today. You still don't see what one has to do with the other? Quite simply: Israel is a colonial state, and climate justice will only exist when "white supremacy" is broken. These are not my words, these are original words of "LütziBleibt".

Anti-capitalism is not dead, it has just taken on a new manifestation. Now they are trying to unhinge the system by cutting off the power to industry. Of course, the fight is also being declared against the cop state. "In the medium term, we must abolish the police as a body that primarily supports the interests of a capitalist system," reads a statement by the anti-coal initiatives.

That the demonstrators would be the first to go under when the law of the strongest rules in the streets is one of the many consequences that don't seem to me to have been properly considered. It is one thing to dump tomato soup over paintings, and quite another to laugh in the face of a Hells Angel who no longer has to fear the police or justice.

I am always amazed at the comradely tone in which activists like Luisa Neubauer are met on "Anne Will" or "Maybrit Illner". Not a clear word, not a critical question. Since I don't assume that Anne Will also dreams of abolishing capitalism, her obligingness stems from opportunism or ignorance. My money is on both.

Of course, the model Green is also spared the question of why she is a member of a group whose umbrella organization calls for bombing terror against civilians. "Yallah Intifada" read a call from "Fridays for Future" just this week again. But hey, what can Luisa Neubauer do about the fact that "Fridays for Future" is full of Israel haters? Besides, it's about the climate!

It's not far from the leftist idea of justice to the system of coercion. The doyen of the climate protection movement, Hans-Joachim Schellnhuber of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, has now proposed that every German be allocated a fixed CO2 budget. Each person should not be allowed to emit more than three tons of CO₂ per year, which is just about the right amount for the global climate. From 2050, emissions are then to be zero.

At the moment, a German citizen emits ten tons of CO₂ per year. So you can start thinking about how you want to get down from that. You won't be able to rely on insight alone. The details are still unclear: Will there be a CO₂ declaration in addition to the tax return? How will CO₂ offenses be monitored? How do you even measure your own emissions? But it won't work without oversight.

In a study published in the scientific journal Nature, researchers from Sweden and Great Britain have worked out how a private emissions trading system could be set up using cell phones. Of course, this would require the abolition of data protection. In the end, it could work like in China. Every movement would be recorded and rated according to its environmental impact. Instead of social points, there would be climate points.

The tragedy of the modern climate movement is that it would not get through at the ballot box with any proposal. How many would be enthusiastic about abolishing the police and capitalism in the medium term? Two percent, three percent? Other movements have already despaired of the intransigence of the masses.

I can understand the unwillingness to follow the climate activists politically. I also have limited trust in people who can't think of anything more than shutting down everything that bothers them.


-------------------------------
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.
Skybird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-23, 11:29 PM   #44
Rockstar
In the Brig
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 12,575
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-23, 09:12 PM   #45
Rockstar
In the Brig
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 12,575
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ostfriese View Post
… Would a degree in chemistry be a sufficient alternative in your opinion?
. Ummm, no. topic isn’t about chemistry really.

Quote:
Dunning-Kruger all around, and it's not just the flat earthers.

I even had the case of one of this "do your own research"-idiots telling me I wasn't able to understand a certain topic, and he linked three scientific papers with the aforementioned "do your own research" in tow - yes, you fool, I did, two of the papers were my own, for the third I was co-author.
Funny you should mention the Dunning-Kruger effect. I brought this up last time someone used that term the way you do. One article from Psychology Today states “that one way to avoid falling prey to the Dunning-Kruger effect, people can honestly and routinely question their knowledge base and the conclusions they draw, rather than blindly accepting them.”.

“How do you fix the Dunning-Kruger effect?
Question what you know and pay attention to those who have different viewpoints. Seek feedback from people you can trust who you know are highly skilled in your area of interest. Be open to constructive criticism and resist the impulse to become defensive. Don’t pretend to know something you don’t. Make it a priority to continue learning and growing.”

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...-kruger-effect

——————————-

In a later article from the same magazine another states the Dunning-Kruger effect isn’t real. “ The Dunning-Kruger effect is commonly invoked in online arguments to discredit other people’s ideas. The effect states that people who know the least about a topic are the most overconfident about that topic while people who know the most tend to be more humble and accurate in their self-assessment. It seems intuitively right, and it’s often a way to undercut people who present their opinions and arguments with "absolute certainty" that they’re right. The only problem is that the Dunning-Kruger effect itself is wrong.”…

“So now if someone online says something cutting about how the person they're arguing with is too stupid to know they’re wrong, you can point them to this post. There is no Dunning-Kruger. Everyone thinks they’re better than average. How’s that for taking the wind out of a dunk?”

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...uger-isnt-real

https://gwern.net/docs/iq/2020-gignac.pdf

Last edited by Rockstar; 01-29-23 at 09:24 PM.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.