Text 11362, 92 rader
Skriven 2007-02-02 09:05:33 av Charlie Edmondson (14800.babylon5)
  Kommentar till text 11305 av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated (14743.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: Cath0licism and Creati=nism
=======================================
Josh Hill wrote:
> On 1 Feb 2007 17:10:22 -0500, vorxion@knockingshopofthemind.com
> (Vorxion) wrote:
> 
> 
>>In article <45c123f4$0$30314$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>, Angelika
Tobisch wrote:
>>
>>>Put down the book and look out of the window some time or watch the
>>>news. Our climate _is_ changing.
>>
>>Assuming that this isn't a generalisation (the weather is -always-
>>changing), in specific to AGW this makes the vast and unfounded inferences
>>that what is happening -right now- is actually part of a steady-state,
>>linear, or exponential one-way trend.  Historical data show that NOT to be
>>true.  In point of fact, there's a roughly 11,000 year period between
>>colder periods and we're nearing the end of one relatively soon.
>>
>>Your statement is tantamount to saying that about 100 very similar frames
>>of film is representative of the millions of frames of film in a full
>>feature reel.  There are so many problems with that, I won't even start.
>>
>>Suffice it to say that almost everyone here has attacked not only me, but
>>James.  Considering I've had "inflammatory" posts rejected in the past,
>>I can only assume there's a double-standard going if you're an extreme
>>regular that posts daily.  At any rate, everyone has reacted about as I'd
>>expect the sheeple of the world to react--quite typically, mind mostly
>>closed, adhering to dogmatic claims repeated often and loudly by our media
>>and a scientific establishment whose credibility is questionable given
>>commercial and governmental interests involved.
> 
> 
> Dude, science is science: it cannot be suborned, because to do so, one
> would have to suborn thousands of scientists, academic institutions,
> and journals. For a well-known example, look at the failed attempt by
> the tobacco industry to suppress the evidence linking smoking and
> cancer.
> 
> As it happens, the "commercial and governmental interests" are the
> ones who are pretending that global warming does not exist; see, for
> example, this article about the Bush Administration's attempts to hide
> the facts on warming from the American public.
> 
>
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013000985.html

> 
> Part of their cynical campaign consists of convincing the public that
> science has somehow been corrupted, while oh-so-honest politicians and
> oil companies have quaffed at the grail of truth.
> 

Josh,
WHAT UNIVERSE DO YOU LIVE IN?????

Of course Science can be suborned!  It has happened hundreds of times 
over the centuries, and will no doubt happen again and again in the 
future!  All it takes is for the "common sense" viewpoint to reach a 
"consensus" and all the power of human greed and self delusion kick in 
to maintain it!  It stays in place until finally, facts come along that 
can no longer be denied, and then a new consensus is established.  That 
is how human minds work, despite the wish of thousands of scientists 
that it didn't.

Now, with AGW, it originally was an interesting theory that maybe the 
amount of CO2 that we produced was effecting the global climate. 
Someone then made a statement that it could be bad.  The radical 
environmental movement than took hold of it as another reason for humans 
to hate themselves, and pushed it for all its worth.  It quickly became 
the 'cause de jour' for political pundits and activists, and the 
pressure was put on the scientific community to come up with the 
evidence to support it!

So, as more and more grant money and tenure was available for AGW 
supporters, and less and less for AGW opponents, Science soon went out 
the window.  The 'PROOF' was found.  All data and computer models were 
massaged and interpreted to make sure that the conclusions needed came 
out.  Today, you can hardly find anyone in the field willing to go 
against the flow.

So, what is the truth?  The truth is that change is happening.  Has 
always happened, and will continue to happen.  Personally, I think the 
changes we have made have been to our (the human race's) advantage 
overall, with deforestation and rice swamps having a much greater effect 
than all our vehicles.  I also personally believe that in 10 years a lot 
of us will be driving electric vehicles (at least 10%) and that using 
less oil is just a smart thing, apart from any climate effects that 
might have.  But that is just me, and has no scientific basis at all.

Charlie
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)