Brant Gaede

Members
  • Content Count

    24,024
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Brant Gaede last won the day on March 19

Brant Gaede had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

85 Excellent

About Brant Gaede

  • Rank
    $$$$$$

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Tucson, AZ
  • Interests
    All kinds of stuff

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    Brant Gaede
  • Description
    Born in 1944 in Tucson, AZ. SF Aidman Vietnam combat veteran. Autodidact. Can drive the big rig. Hike and fly. Weep and write. Shoot and scoot.
  • Favorite Music, Artworks, Movies, Shows, etc.
    Rand novels, The David, Shane, The Ox-Bow Incident, Forbidden Planet, Things to Come, The Wild Bunch, Oliver, Star Wars, Charade, North by Northwest, Psycho, Vertigo, Red River, Empire of the Sun, etc. Music: only the good stuff--e.g., Lynyrd Skynyrd "Simple Man"
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking

Recent Profile Visitors

47,834 profile views
  1. Oh, you're paving the way for the statists but you aren't a statist. Look, let's let CO2 happen; it's going to anyway. More plant and animal life AND the planet qua planet isn't at risk. Just the polluting humanoids. Let them eat their just desserts. Now correlate your supposed scientific position with us living in an interglacial period likely to end sooner rather than later. Maybe saving humanity--is that what you're about?--is pumping into the atmosphere all the CO2 we can as fast as we can? Your essential triteness has been noted.If you're honest here you are trite and if dishonest you're that and trite. Now about a ad h. There is a ad h and simple ad h. The latter is not a logical fallacy. --Brant
  2. What should we do about AGW? For the sake of the "discussion" let's go to the next level and talk about costs. --Brant
  3. Altruism was appropriated by the totalitarians for moral justification for their idiological snarmniness and Rand countered with "selfishness" thereby justifying in her own way tyranny if tyranny be a value to whomever. The major flaw in her philosophy is its center in morality instead of politics and it's implicit and explicit morality. She was not wrong about rational self interest but she never recognized the nature of self interest in altruism. Of course, the religionists used altruism the same way the totalitarians did, to justify themselves and to control the subjugated and to subjugate. What has been obscured in this ideological warfare by its sheer bilateralism is actual human nature. The irony of the world of Atlas Shrugged is the sheer human destruction by the men of the mind going on strike is exponentially greater than anything the totalitarians have managed to achieve too date. Now I know I am mixing up my categories, fiction and non-fiction, and Rand declared she was trying to prevent a socialistic America, but Rand too was always mixing up those categories. However, man the individualist was also and always man the provider and man (man and woman, of course) the protector. Man and his (her) family. The irony is the Atlas bad boys were the heroes who let the other bad boys play just to practically illustrate in every way Rand could imagine how bad the bad boys and their policies could be to the USA. Not included, though, were anything like the Nazi and Communist genocides. Just good old Mr. Thompson and naked John Galt on the rack. That was essentially the end of her magnum opus. In her previous novel naked Howard Roark laughed. Roark led straight to Galt. This is why there is no Objectivist movement. The Objectivists are in Galt's Gulch. --Brant
  4. He's practicing and acquiring credentials for the sake of money and power. That's my speculation.😀 But the CC political horse is dead in this country. Since he spells favor favour he seems to be abroad. I don't really care. If Jonathan weren't engaging him he'd evaporate here. Data dumping isn't reasoning. It's bullying. This isn't a scientific forum. OL isn't about data wars in spite of William's efforts. --Brant
  5. The implcit working premise that CC science is neither corrupt nor corruptible does not pave the way for a rational discussion about CC. And to call it CC instead of AGW is chocolate frosting on a lemon cake. --Brant
  6. Are you ready to advocate legislation? If so, what? I'm assuming your interest is more than atomistic intellectual. --Brant
  7. I've read it's a piece of shit. --Brant
  8. C'mon. What else is he gonna call it? My blog/Your blog? My Notablog? --Brant
  9. My bag. I was focused on repeatable science not THE repeatable science. Or, I thought I was speaking generally, not particularly. I misread you and wrongly kept the "the." --Brant
  10. No one has said they don't understand the repeatable science. This is not a lecture hall. No one has engaged you as a teacher--not here. --Brant
  11. William inviting Brad and the shithead here was bad faith on steroids. Someone whose name I won't mention once described him--I'm afraid accurately--as a "conflict junky." His superciliousness has become blatantly apparent. I'd guess his going off the rails like this has a lot to do with the election of Donald Trump. Like the left generally maybe he's in a state of fulmination. I like the guy, or so I thought, but the important and bigger picture is the red-blue divide as the United States continues its slow descent into a true civil war. The process appears inexorable. I think the result will be what happened in Chile decades ago with the rule of the strongman brutally crushing the left. The to be crushed want to crush using present government agency, but when that gets too toxic the tanks will roll. Even if they don't the reds--how's that for verbal irony?--have the guns. This will likely take a two decade play out unless Trump neuters the left or the left neuters itself. Unlike communism powered by the intellectual and moral force of Marxism-Leninism, the left has literally nothing left but the sanction of the victim. That's still working. --Brant this is not a ban William plea; it's way too much fun watching these miscreants try and fail and helping them fail; they are intellectual inoculation for going to intellectual seed
  12. I guess William did invite Brad here. They're both data dumpers. But when it comes to climatology there are no climatologists on site. At least none so self identified. --Brant
  13. CC is political if it's used as a substitute for AGW. Per se climate change as all physical phenomena is legitimately a scientific subject. --Brant
  14. Godwin's Law is not a law of physics nor a true counter argument to anything without an add on explanation. --Brant