Troy

@Del, I know you are not a mind reader, despite your vocation so I'll clarify a few things. I never use my credentials in the manner that your described to win arguments, that would make for a very weak argument. I was making a point about people who are willing to argue with someone on a subject where one people demonstrably knows more. I gave several example of this including your knowledge of Astrology, but you are so fixated on believing what you want to believe the point which was clearly expressed escaped you, but I'll rephrase: The climatologist and scientist who study this stuff no far more than I do. I would never try to use what minimal knowledge I have to rejects their findings. I say this because I know they know a lot more than I do. Credentials, study, and experience do matter. I don't remember you ever conceding that I was right about sampling, but that is big 'cause you quite adamant that I was wrong. Del the statement above has nothing to do with what I wrote. Did you know the problem with Newton's calculations were discovered to be wrong because they failed to properly calculate the path of the planet Mercury? I assume that you know the orbit of a planet is not in the realm of quantum physics. You wrote "You are wrong," but I'm not. You just don't know enough yet to know why. Now if you asked me for proof I'll tell you to look it up, because we had this conversation before (why is why I used the example), and I now know you never used the opportunity to learn anything. Del in the documentation that YOU provided they explained why the temperature numbers were recast, and may be recast in the future. Honestly, did you read the entire website? Basically, they are attempting to compensate for known problems with the historical temperature taking methodology. For example, the old style thermometers were less accurate, and they use sophisticated computer models to correct for the measurements. Del figuring this stuff out is not as simple as correlating CO2 levels with temperature over time... again, with all due respect my friend, I don't think you know enough about the subject to speak intelligently about it, let alone reject the findings, of the world's scientists. I know I don't. I still don't comprehend you think that you do? If we were face to face and you told me I never presented Pioneer with information to support my claims, I would have said, "N-word, STFU 'cause you don't know what the h-ll you're talkin' about."

Lowell Hawthorne, President of Golden Crust, whose remarkable life was chronicled in his memoir, The Baker’s Son: My Life in Business, tragically took is own life Saturday. I met this Brother earlier in the year at a party for his publisher Akashic books. My initial take was a low key brother with a pleasant demeanor. I would never have known he was worth tens of millions of dollars. His business story was quite remarkable.

Del I don't delete posts when people are wrong, or even say stupid things, but I will reject them including your statement that I've never provided Pioneer proof, because it is false. I told you, in a manner of speaking, to STFU, because you on that point you don't know what you are talking about and you are becoming increasing arrogant in your ignorance. Even sinking as low as to suck up to Pioneer, Have you no shame! @Pioneer1 can be confident that I'll agree, or disagree, based upon my own opinion or my knowledge of given subject. I'll even adjust my opinion accordingly. @Del have you ever modified your opinion on anything as a result of something you've read here? If so, can you share one or two examples? If not, how can you grow, if you always think you are right and everyone else is always wrong? I bolded the question to ensure that you saw it. @Cynique, I'll say poorly educated because this science is not that new; plus the American public education system is known to be poor by global, first world, standards. Man's knowledge changes over time and that knowledge takes time to disseminate. Isaac Newton laws of gravity stood for hundreds of years until they were shown to be wrong. The calculations are good enough for a great many of things, but 'ole Isaac did not know anything about the warping of space/time and as you suggest even Einsteins who corrected Newton, can be corrected as well. Look you can have a great life completely ignorant of space/time, the nature of race, or even the causes of global warming. But when you say things that direct contradict what the best minds have collectively determined, based solely upon your own uninformed musings, you just sound like a kook. The world is not flat gentlemen.

OREO, was originally published in 1974, is the only book written by Fran Ross, OREO, an AALBC.com bestselling book, tells the story of a young woman, nicknamed Oreo. I'm still collecting votes for your Favorite Black Authors of the 21st Century (I'll update the list with the most recent entries shortly). I have to eliminate a lot of authors because one of the rules is that the authors had to have been alive and published a book in the 21st century. Jimmy Baldwin would be at the top of the list give the number of votes he has received. Baldwin was #8 on the 20th Century List. Some submitted Fran Ross who passed in 1985. While Fran does not qualify for the 21st century list, it did bring to mind the book she published, which Thumper reviewed back in 2002, when Northeastern republished it along with a umber of other classic titles. Gs book was republished again in 2015, and is definitely worth checking out.

The price will be right to enjoy a wonderful book festival in Kingston Jamaica, WI. Details to follow! Sign up for the AALBC.com eNewsletter to be sure you get the details as soon as they become available.

@Del refer to the link you shared on the other conversation:

One of the consequences of selling books is that you learn a few things...things that you are anxious to share, which is what makes it worthwhile. @Del, this is a tired debate with @Pioneer1, over the years I've presented him with a great deal of information to show that there is on one race. Indeed, this website covers the subject quite well. I'm afraid you don't know what I know what I've shared with Pioneer in the past, so you really should stay quiet on this point. Just because Pioneer says I've never shared evidence with him does not make it so. Again, a cursory search on this forum shows that not to be true. Look, I was poorly educated in science like you too obviously were; and was taught there were multiple races, which it was known to be factually inaccurate. But I grew up and read more widely and learned what science has known for a long time. This is old news guys, I'm sorry you reject the information, but your inability to accept known science, because you refuse to change your minds, is just dumb. Pioneer when you cite sources that misuse the word, that is not proof. We all know humans are described as if there are different races, but that is sloppy and scientifically inaccurate: “Race is an invented political system, not a natural biological division. The Human Genome Project has confirmed that the human species cannot be divided into genetically distinguishable races. Race is a political grouping created to support slavery and colonialism, and its boundary lines have shifted over time and across nations to suit political ends…” —Dorothy Roberts, author of Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, And Big Business Re-Create Race In The Twenty-First Century Again, as @Cynique, pointed out it is a semantic issue; and one that I argue is confusing people, leading them to believe there are multiple human races. We need another term. I don't think "breed" is the right word. We need another way to talk about people that eliminate "race." Ethnicity, phenotypical characteristics, nationality, culture are all fine. From almost 15 years ago: PBS Program- Race: the Power of an Illusion I've also shared volumes of information about the subject on the website with Books we've reviewed: The Myth Of Race/The Reality Of Racism: Critical Essays The Race Myth: Why We Pretend Race Exists in America Of course there is much more, but again if one rejects science, and would rather hold onto their stone age ways of thinking, there is nothing I can do about it. Once one is presented with the truth they can no longer claim ignorance, then only thing left is stubborn stupidity. I willing to work with ignorance, stupidity requires a professional. So while I've reshared information here, moving forward I will not continually share and reshare information with someone, on a subject, once they have made it clear they will not change their mind. Pioneer's view on the subject of race is one such situation.

Del thanks for sharing that link there a wealth off information about climate change. I'm not sure why you still have these question after seeing all this information. The site explains, for example how they ca,lculated the 97% number: Do scientists agree on climate change? Yes, the vast majority of actively publishing climate scientists – 97 percent – agree that humans are causing global warming and climate change. Most of the leading science organizations around the world have issued public statements expressing this, including international and U.S. science academies, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and a whole host of reputable scientific bodies around the world. A list of these organizations is provided here. They also provide an interesting graph of the global temperature changes: Global temperature rise from 1880 to 2015. Higher-than-normal temperatures are shown in red and lower-than-normal temperatures are shown in blue. Each frame represents global temperature anomalies (changes) averaged over the five years previous to that particular year. Credit: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center/NASA Scientific Visualization Studio/NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies. If you want the underlying temperature data and can't find it on the website, why don't you reach out to NASA and ask them for it--not everything is on the web. Maybe you have to go to the library. If can't be that hard to find if you extend your search beyond the web. I also see from the site that measuring temperatures are far more complicated than I imaged. The accuracy of the equipment has changed over time, and as the locations where temperatures are measured have becomes more urbanized temperature would go of because cities are hotter. But these are scientists and they are not stupid, so they are working to factor all this into their measurements. Without understanding what you are looking at taking temperature data alone (I see now) is not nearly enough. This is why I leave this stuff to the experts who study this stuff.

@Cynique, yes this argument is about semantics, or rather what the word "race" means and how it should be used technically. To argue this is not about "facts" is a weak argument that can be made about anything. @Delano, this is the argument that 45 and his ilk uses against the way news is reported, as in there are "alternative facts." This is why we have so much more access to information but as a people we know and understand so much less. "Breed" would actually be a better word to use than "race" in the way that @Pioneer1 is using it. Siblings could be of different "breeds," but still be of the same human race.

So you believe virtually all of the planet's scientific community (save the ones in the pocket of big oil) are all making this up to enrich themselves?

White men do crooked things to enrich themselves. What else is new? If scientists decide to revise their forecasts I'll change my mind, but Al's finances are not a strong enough reason to change my mind at this point. Again, while it was a reason for me not to take him at his word originally, now he has the globe's scientific community on his side.

Search 45's income.

Sure, I'm sure Al Gore and his massive carbon footprint was one reason I discounted his story, but I can't ignore all the other scientists. Why would they all lie and deceive us?

So @Pioneer1 I'll take that to mean "yes." This is why eliminating racial attitudes (racism, prejudice, bigotry) will take a very long time. First, folks, both Black and white, who think like you have to die out and stop spreading this kind of thinking. Man that would be easy. When white folks were living in caves and killing each other for food. Black people were building pyramids and universities that lasted not hundreds, but thousands of years. Everything the Greeks knew was derived from Africa. But that is not to say the Black people are superior, in fact white people come from Black people... we are one race of people.

No, not any more, because you can easily look it up yourself. Now I know you won't look it up, because you know what they say about where to put something if you don't want knee-grows to discover it....

I've never read any of Feynman's books, but I really enjoy his videos--one of the greatest things about the web is the ability to hear someone like him speak. I doubt I I would have heard of him otherwise. Del is the only other person I know who has mentioned his name. I would imagine most scientists would say astrology is rubbish. To me that is like saying a belief in God is rubbish, as I'm sure many would. I agree with almost everything Pioneer wrote in the post above. Yes the U.S. has some of the best universities on Earth, indeed this is where many of these foreign students are educated...for now. I teach at one of New York, best pubic schools, and have been for several years. I've taught hundreds of students but less than a handful of Black Americans. Of course the the countries most prestigious Private schools in STEM subjects. A girl who graduated after I did from under grad was he first Black woman to graduate my school with a civil engineering degree! Absolutely, a complicated lie which sounds good is always more desirable than the complicated truth. I often think those with the most willingness to tell these lies can achieve the most financial success in America. ----------------- Skip to the 17:30 mark, it is my favorite part of the video.

Mel I apparently did not communicate that point clearly. Allow me to elaborate. First, there is absolutely nothing wrong with questioning to understand; it is absolutely crucial to learning. I teach web design to college students. I don't have a degree in web design nor have I ever taken a course in it. I learned by doing. One of the assignments this semester was to critique my website. Of course I know a lot more about web design than my students but I also know I can learn from my them too. But the subject is web design and much of it is very subjective and almost anyone is qualified to have an opinion. I took a course in astrology many years ago and have some passing interest in the subject. Del has studied it intensely for a long period of time. Now I might debate Del on the various qualities of sun signs but his knowledge greatly exceeds mine and there will be areas where I'd be much better off listening rather than talking. I doubt Del has a "degree" in astrology that does not to me for he has demonstrated a knowledge of the subject. As far as string theory is considered Michio helped invent the theory. I don't have enough of a background to understand the underlying principles, let alone question him on any of it. I think calling that "bowing down," is a bit much, but it would be silly for me to challenge the theory on any level because I simply don't know enough. That does not mean that he is right, and he would not say he is right. Again, I understand that I don't know enough to speak on the matter. All I can do is marvel at the idea of 11 dimensional vibrating strings as the most fundamental building blocks of the universe--assuming that even comes close to describing it I'm not saying I should not be challenged because I have a couple of engineering degrees, but what I am saying is that people, in general, feel way too comfortable challenging others on subjects they know nothing about. I did not believe with Al Gore when he first introduced climate change to the mainstream media, he was just a guy with slides, sort of like Del with his spreadsheet analysis. But over time, based upon the overwhelming consensus of 97% of scientists, climate change is both real and something we really should be working on. There are smart and decent people voted for 45, deny evolution, and deny manmade climate change. However, society would be better off if we understood how this thinking--indeed humanity's survival may actually dependent upon it.

No the film is certainly not a "comedy," despite the comic relief that you described. I had no idea the Academy called it a comedy, I don't really follow the awards. I just ran a few queries, but i don't see any indication that it was described as a comedy. Can you share a link.

Oh Brother Del. Just forget it... What in this video, which addressed all of your points refuting climate change, do you still reject? The video is only 6 minutes long.

I think Michio is correct. I also think he may be understating American's precarious position. There is no "rise of conservatives" they have always been here. I know this is really hard for folks who come from big cosmopolitan cities like New York City, but most of the country is not like NYC. Shoot, most of New York State, including Staten Island (which is part of NYC) is not like NYC. I think I'm the only tagged on this conversation with an actual engineering degree (two). But my education has never stopped anyone less credentialled from questioning my knowledge of the subject. This is a curious thing. For example, I would never question Michio's knowledge of string theory and more than I would question Del's knowledge of astrology. They clearly know more about the subjects than I do. This is also why I believe what the world climatologist tell us about climate change. When people create an analogy between belief in "religion" and belief in "climate change," they are making a mistake. Belief in religion is based upon faith. Evidence is not needed, all that is required is belief. However climate change is based upon evidence. This may come to a surprise to people who live in big cities, but there are many American who reject the theory of evolution--despite ample evidence against it. The fact that the majority of scientists believe in evolution means nothing to these people. Of course it would take very little effort, especially today, to find "evidence" and scientists who reject evolution. It is possible for people to create their own realities and there are plenty of resources available today to help reinforce any hairbrain scheme out there. Yeah, Michio understated America's educational predicament.

Del you are asking the wrong question. I know you want to make the science of climate change about me and what I know. I guess this is a mental trick you are playing with yourself, because it is much easier to disagree with me rather than the vast majority of climatologists who believe climate change is real and that man is causing it. For the bazillionth time, I did not make the measurements, collect, and interpret the information. I'm reporting it to you. In much the same way I'd report on evolution or the structure of an atom. The question that you should be asking is: Does this one guy, even with a nobel prize in an unrelated subject, know more than all the other scientists who study the subject? Why do you take Ivar Giaever's word over Dr. Neil deGrass Tyson's? Of course the answer is that Ivar's opinion agrees with your opinion--even though Ivar's information conflict with what the vast majority of scientists tell us. Listening to Ivar was like listening to the GM exec Lutz (I hope Lutz's home in the Florida Keys home was flooded this year) contradict everything that Tyson was saying.

Sorry about the typos. I corrected the sentence. I'm not arguing that the social construct is not real. I'm arguing it is based upon outdated information. Social constructs do not have to be, and usually are not, based upon genetics -- in fact, that is what makes them social constructs. For example, the fact the Barack Obama is "Black" and not white is social construct, made upon by man with no basis in genetics. It seems race is an important aspect of poverty as it relates to the so called Black man. White folks used "race" to justify turning another human being into chattel. Since Black people were of an inferior race, they could be lumped in with other animals like hogs and mules, 'cept it was cool to have sex with them to make more... @Pioneer1, do you think white folks were justified in the beliefs that the so called Black race was inferior? It seems to me if you believe white people and Black people belong to different races, then is is fair to assume that those differences can make one race superior to the other. Since white people dominate the planet win, all the Noble prizes for science, and Black folks can't seem to earn as much money, stay out of jail, or live as long as white folks, wouldn't it be fair to assume that white people are indeed superior? It seems most of our most successful Black men marry white women. Maybe you are right Pioneer, maybe white folks are a different and superior race. This is a perfectly logical conclusion given your understanding of "race."

LOL! @Pioneer1, I'm surprised you did not embrace that quote without reservation. Unfortunately the holidays are a very depressing time for some, as their lives fail compare the the fictionalized versions we see everywhere we look. My biggest compliant about this time of the year is how hyper-commercialized the season has become. It was bad when I was a kid, but is seems crazy now. Do people really have nothing better to do that spend money on more things they can't possibly need? I got a big of email from different folks today claiming it is "Giving Tuesday." Where the heck did that day come from? They really should make it the Tuesday before Black Friday, and Cyber Monday when people still have some money left... Well sounds like you have a fine day, despite it all. I'm glad

@HICKSON, where are you in the London Reign photo?

Hmmm, It is interesting that you asked Pioneer if he looked at your slides before responding, but you clearly did not watch the videos before responding to them. The video in which several of your bullet points was address is the one I posted in the other conversation. No, I do not think the video will answer any questions to your satisfaction. That video does not exist. Your beliefs are cast in concrete. While I'd hoped the video might have some impact on you, the video was not just posted for your benefit, but for others who may have questions on the subject.