- Capitalism and Alternatives -

but you do

Posted by: Gee ( si ) on July 13, 1999 at 12:22:22:

In Reply to: I don't think so posted by Samuel Day Fassbinder on July 12, 1999 at 10:16:59:

: SDF: And I'm arguing that you're arguing corporate nonsense. Glad we got that cleared up.

So, when scientists receive funds from industrialists they are wrong, when they receive them from the WWF or Greenpeace they are right and when government funded they refelct the 'will of the people'?

: derived from Julian Simon's The Ultimate Resource II

Thanks for actually linking the book, you no doubt see it as damning itself, but linking it is surprisingly non partisan of you.

My caution, ofcourse, is in inteprating scientifically gathered data and making conclusions ther on.

The herman daly review relies heavily on nitpicking Simons book and 'proving' via entropy that if the universe is slowly dying then resources cant really be infinite thus we must start now, today, in restricting our use of them. The premise is accurate the conclusion spurious and unconnected.

:SDF: This article has as its presupposition the notion that scientific truth is a matter of taking a vote among scientists.

Strange you would be against this, as you seem to think it proper to apply them same to peoples lives.

: SDF: This tries to discredit the idea of CO2 as a "greenhouse" by making an illicit comparison between global warming in natural history as a product of increases in solar luminosity,

Illicit because you have decided that it must be CO2. Loads of CO2 and you get a greenhouse effect, its been shown to happen therefore it must be the cause of current warming on earth. Well this is the same as saying pollution has been shown to affect so called 'monitor' animals like frogs therefore a mutated frog *must* be a sign of pollution. hence my reference to the frog debacle recently which made such a blind stab in the dark connection without seeing what was *actually* happening.

You seem to have a lot of confidence that humans *must* be the cause of global warming based upon the above type of leap from a true premise (CO2 is shown to be a 'greenhouse gas') to a conclusion (therefore humans cause global warming) without having absolute certainty.

Mankind - guilty unless proven innocent?

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup