- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Do you always dismiss that which you don't understand?

Posted by: Farinata ( L'inferno ) on September 27, 1999 at 16:43:13:

In Reply to: Joke's on you Spud! posted by R$$$$clever attempt at getting us to admit that Frenchy on September 27, 1999 at 15:21:34:

: : Yup, that's one penetrating wit, alright.

: : (Also read what the Cult of the Dead Cow have to say on him...)

: : : PS. From which colleges did you graduate? Are you a professor?

: : Nope. I'm a computer engineer. I got a B.Sc. in space science from University College London, looked at the funding crisis in the UK with respect to space science and promptly decided that computers were an easier way of making a living.

: Hey, Farintina, guys like you are a laugh a minute.
: Now here's something for you to laugh at.

: It was the 'intelektual' classes here and in old Blimey that were defending the murder of millions of kulaks by Stalin in the thirties, the time when Reagan was to stupid to be a Commie.

Meanwhile, the others were commenting on what a good guy Hitler was; like Charles Lindbergh...

(Actually, the West didn't know about the gulags or the NKVD in the 1930s.)

: If being stupid means knowing the difference between right and wrong, give me stupid.

OK. Is killing the planet on which you live right or wrong?

: Anyhow, thanx for your stats, they don't mean squat.

You haven't managed to refute them with any shreds of evidence for your point of view. I give you arguments and statistics to support my arguments, you just dismiss them as junk. Guess who's actually referring to the physical world here?

: By the by old chap, are you familiar with this;

: Richard G. Green, President of the Dallas Geological Society, sent the following letter to President Bill Clinton on November 14, 1997;
: The Dallas Geological Society is a non-partisan, scientific organization with over 700 members. We have member geologists in the environmental, petroleum, and water resource industries.

Sounds pretty non-partisan to me, yeah...given that the petroleum industry is one of the world's largest two polluters (the meat industry is the other). Given that Texas would be bankrupted by a major blip in oil prices...

: We are united on very few issues, but we are united in our opposition the the proposed UN Kyoto accord. Global cooling and warming are natural and well documented in the geological record with no human cause or effect. The concept of global warming caused by man is based on poor science. The evidence is clear and compelling that global warming due to CO2 is not occuring and we strongly urge that the US not sign this misguided accord. The environment is not in danger from global warming and we will stand to oppose this folly.

The folly is theirs; the GEO-2000 survey was the largest and most complete environmental audit the world has ever seen.

One of the pertinent conclusions here was that "1998 was the hottest year on record, and extreme weather events had left 3 million people dead in the last five years."

(Couple this with the Red Cross's Human Disaster Report 1999, which conluded that "Environmental refugees account for some 58 per cent of all refugees worldwide." and "Three million people per year are made homeless by flooding." - isn't it obvious that environmental damage has a seriously costly effect on the environment as well as the economy. Even the most die-hard capitalist should realise that rehousing these people is a serious drain on the world economy.)

So, let's see, we have 700 Texans on one side; and the UN, the Red Cross, NASA, The US, UK and European Meteorological Offices and most of the rest of the world on the other. Which side do you reckon has access to more data and a more up-to-date set of climate models?

: As scientists, we have generally not gotten involved in political issues even if they involve science. We have no political agendas.

Texans with no political agendas? That's got to be a first...

: However, this issue is so serious to the United States and the economic stability of the country we felt we must write. We have references and scientific data to support our conclusions available to you, your vice-president, or any other government official. Our members study the planet and we understand its history.

- but not enough to actually cite any studies that agree with their point of view; it's just classic deus ex machina stuff; "we're experts and we believe x is wrong, therefore we're asking you to stop it now".

Unfortunately, Frenchy, I can give you facts and figures to support my contentions; it's not enough for you to just laugh at my data, since you have none of your own and no apparent background in the subject.

Doubtless you'd say that Klaus Topfer (head of the UNEP) said "it is...essential to force multinational companies to be accountable for their actions" because he wanted to damage the US economy (despite the fact that the US is heading for a record trade deficit).


blockquote>‘The continued poverty of the majority of the planet’s inhabitants and excessive consumption by the minority are the two major causes of environmental degradation. The present course is unsustainable and postponing action is no longer an option.’

- major conclusion of the GEO-2000 project researched by the UN Environment Programme - 30 major institutes, 800+ unconnected individuals, 100 countries; one conclusion.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup