If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Maybe OT Tesla
On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 08:05:32 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote: On 2018-06-04 20:45, Bill W wrote: On Mon, 04 Jun 2018 15:30:39 -0700, Savageduck Why does that article have the appearance of total BS? Probably for the same reason that all of the climate change crap looks like total BS to people like me - total skeptics. There are very many highly intelligent people out there who disagree on this subject, and an awful lot of what is published, and what you Most subject matter experts agree at large the AGW is real, Okay... serious Maybe... and dangerous. I doubt that. The "skeptics" usually have commercial interests at "heart". Usually? That's a bit mushy. But, hey, the IPCC report compiled by scientists from around the world from a wide range of expertise groups can't mean much, right? The report and summary are two different things, and it's the corrupted summaries that are fed to the squirming masses. And radio talk show hosts must know more, right? Serious people don't listen to that stuff. reliably see on the MSM is quite disingenuous. There is no truth on this subject, just opinions, and wild guesses. No. There is hard science that's been accumulating and refining over many decades. Yes, that's true. The problem is how that data and research are used. Once any issue has been politicized, it becomes nothing more than a fight between true believers of their side. If you won't admit that there are smart people on both sides, both with plausible conclusions, then you have stopped being a thinking person, and have become an activist, nothing more. The basic thing is you can't keep spewing massive amounts of pollution and expecting there to be no effect. Sure, but there is no truth at this time regarding what that effect will be. And the US is not spewing those massive amounts. The problem needs to be addressed elsewhere. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Maybe OT Tesla
On 6/7/2018 11:14 PM, Bill W wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 08:05:32 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2018-06-04 20:45, Bill W wrote: On Mon, 04 Jun 2018 15:30:39 -0700, Savageduck Why does that article have the appearance of total BS? Probably for the same reason that all of the climate change crap looks like total BS to people like me - total skeptics. There are very many highly intelligent people out there who disagree on this subject, and an awful lot of what is published, and what you Most subject matter experts agree at large the AGW is real, Okay... serious Maybe... and dangerous. I doubt that. The "skeptics" usually have commercial interests at "heart". Usually? That's a bit mushy. But, hey, the IPCC report compiled by scientists from around the world from a wide range of expertise groups can't mean much, right? The report and summary are two different things, and it's the corrupted summaries that are fed to the squirming masses. And radio talk show hosts must know more, right? Serious people don't listen to that stuff. reliably see on the MSM is quite disingenuous. There is no truth on this subject, just opinions, and wild guesses. No. There is hard science that's been accumulating and refining over many decades. Yes, that's true. The problem is how that data and research are used. Once any issue has been politicized, it becomes nothing more than a fight between true believers of their side. If you won't admit that there are smart people on both sides, both with plausible conclusions, then you have stopped being a thinking person, and have become an activist, nothing more. The basic thing is you can't keep spewing massive amounts of pollution and expecting there to be no effect. Sure, but there is no truth at this time regarding what that effect will be. And the US is not spewing those massive amounts. The problem needs to be addressed elsewhere. In the book " Political Tribes: Group Instinct and the Fate of Nations" [by: Amy Chua, Julia Whelan] they cite studies that show [totally paraphrased from memory] numerically adept people tend to impress their bias on data sets .. and further that the resulting bias is stronger for the more educated/numerically adept. This agrees with what you say about smart people on both sides reaching different conclusions. ~~ Even so, I doubt anyone believes pollution is a good thing. -- == Later... Ron C -- |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Maybe OT Tesla
On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 23:49:45 -0400, Ron C wrote:
Even so, I doubt anyone believes pollution is a good thing. One problem is CO2 is not a pollutant. Life on earth almost entirely requires CO2 for its existence and present levels (even the elevated levels are much closer to extinguishing life than is really comfortable. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
More Tesla performance | Bill W | Digital Photography | 3 | July 21st 17 02:42 PM |