Social conservative, fiscal libertarian, anti-government K T Cat is more ecologically conscious than the head of the IPCC or that fat fraud, Al Gore. I telecommute as much as possible and use weekly teleconferences to avoid flying cross-country. My warmongering father has devoted his 3 acres in San Diego to the preservation and care of native species.
I'm sure you can dredge up examples of Catholics behaving badly, but I doubt that they would strike at the heart of the faith - that Christ died for our sins. The cases of priestly sexual abuse or high living by this Cardinal or that are indeed horrible, but they don't get to the kernel of the faith - they're all peripheral sins.
In contrast, Copenhagen and it's attendant monster carbon footprint is not noteworthy at all. That tells you a great deal about the GW movement. In their hearts, the leaders don't actually believe in it.
I think it is important to separate the work and statements of the scientists from what political leaders are saying. I'd also add to that anyone who makes a living as a talking head - remember what we thought about communications majors in college. Lately a number of people I've worked with have been quoted saying ridiculous things. I tend to believe that the media has either misquoted them or taken gotcha quotes.
I'm always skeptical of opposing arguments based on character assassination. Remember that when you can't refute the argument, go after the messenger. Questioning the scientists motives, like how can we trust them, they actually get paid for doing this research, is not only insulting, it also just doesn't make sense. The world is based on paying experts to advise you on matters that you don't have any experience. Besides, if you really want to follow the money, look at the corporations backing the deniers, they have the true financial motivation to lie.
When I used to do research, I discovered that it was hard to get funded to work on problemns that didn't have big consequences if they weren't solved. There has always been a bias towards hysteria in selling a research project.
I wonder if the Department of Agriculture's research programs was this hip and cool, would the news media be reporting that the world was going to end soon due to attacks by swarms of mutant honeybees?
4 comments:
Was this video peer-reviewed?
;-)
Actually, the thing that gives me pause is that the leaders of the global warming movement don't believe in it themselves.
Social conservative, fiscal libertarian, anti-government K T Cat is more ecologically conscious than the head of the IPCC or that fat fraud, Al Gore. I telecommute as much as possible and use weekly teleconferences to avoid flying cross-country. My warmongering father has devoted his 3 acres in San Diego to the preservation and care of native species.
I'm sure you can dredge up examples of Catholics behaving badly, but I doubt that they would strike at the heart of the faith - that Christ died for our sins. The cases of priestly sexual abuse or high living by this Cardinal or that are indeed horrible, but they don't get to the kernel of the faith - they're all peripheral sins.
In contrast, Copenhagen and it's attendant monster carbon footprint is not noteworthy at all. That tells you a great deal about the GW movement. In their hearts, the leaders don't actually believe in it.
Was this video peer-reviewed?
I'm sure it wasn't.
I think it is important to separate the work and statements of the scientists from what political leaders are saying. I'd also add to that anyone who makes a living as a talking head - remember what we thought about communications majors in college. Lately a number of people I've worked with have been quoted saying ridiculous things. I tend to believe that the media has either misquoted them or taken gotcha quotes.
I'm always skeptical of opposing arguments based on character assassination. Remember that when you can't refute the argument, go after the messenger. Questioning the scientists motives, like how can we trust them, they actually get paid for doing this research, is not only insulting, it also just doesn't make sense. The world is based on paying experts to advise you on matters that you don't have any experience. Besides, if you really want to follow the money, look at the corporations backing the deniers, they have the true financial motivation to lie.
When I used to do research, I discovered that it was hard to get funded to work on problemns that didn't have big consequences if they weren't solved. There has always been a bias towards hysteria in selling a research project.
I wonder if the Department of Agriculture's research programs was this hip and cool, would the news media be reporting that the world was going to end soon due to attacks by swarms of mutant honeybees?
:-)
Post a Comment