Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (100560)	2/15/2005 12:29:51 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) of 793698

<<Many details about climate interactions are not well understood, and there are ample grounds for continued research to provide a better basis for understanding climate dynamics. The question of what to do about climate change is also still open. But there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. Climate scientists have repeatedly tried to make this clear. It is time for the rest of us to listen.>> It think that the piece you posted covers the angles on this. I'm going to parse this last paragraph out of sequence. <<But there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change.>> Civilization is affecting climate. I believe that this is a generally accepted and true statement. There's been a lot of work done on the effects of greenhouse gasses and other crap in the atmosphere. And it's pretty elementary that cutting down the world's trees affects climate. <<Many details about climate interactions are not well understood, and there are ample grounds for continued research to provide a better basis for understanding climate dynamics.>> This is important. We may know about greenhouse gasses and trees but we don't know enough about climate. Climate is an extraordinarily complex system. We don't begin to know how all these factors work together, particularly in the out years. <<The question of what to do about climate change is also still open. >> Here we go. We don't know what will happen. We don't know if what will happen will be good or bad or if we should care at all. And we don't know what we could do about it if we knew what will happen and why we should care. <<Climate scientists have repeatedly tried to make this clear. It is time for the rest of us to listen.>> This is the religion part. The oracle has spoken and we must give offerings to the climate gods. Folks on both sides run those four elements together. You have nuts on the left that go from greenhouse gas accumulation to Henny Penny to asceticsim in the blink of an eye and a genuflection. You have nuts on the right who deny human effects because to acknowledge them is that's just too grey for them or too much like appeasement. Seems to me, Mary, that you're tying yourself up arguing over the first point, the human effects, where the sides are irrevocably dug in. I think it's more useful to focus on point three, why does it matter. The closest thing to an answer in that piece is "but our grandchildren will surely blame us if they find that we understood the reality of anthropogenic climate change and failed to do anything about it." Not letting down our grandchildren is a most worthwhile motivator. But shouldn't we first know down from what?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next