SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : The Environmentalist Thread

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: greenspirit who wrote (20222)2/11/2008 12:16:06 AM
From: neolib  Read Replies (1) of 36917
 
As I said, if you cannot discredit the information, the next best thing is to attempt to discredit the person. An obviously flawed tactic used over and over by those who oppose objective reasoning.

I note you don't want to deal with the abundant evidence that Seitz has not exactly been a very good scientist for quite some time. Why don't you at least have the honesty to comment on the tobacco issue.

If somebody lies to you 99% of the time, one can state that logically you should not condemn him this particular time, as he might be telling the truth. Well, logically yes. In practice, he is a lying sack of shit. The problems Seitz has are all of his own making, nobody stuck a gun to his head to made him debase himself professionaly.

I note that when it comes to Al Gore, you have no problem bashing the messenger either, so get off your high horse Sure Al is given to a bit of grandstanding, but the odd thing is, he gets the science pretty well. The reason he does is that he sides with the scientists doing good work, he does not stick his neck out and go with a bunch of wackos. He didn't invent any of it himself, so he does not deserve all the credit he has gotten IMO.

I will happily point out the problems with Seitz. But you have not shown much scientific understanding, so I doubt it will do much good. Unfortunately, on this board I chased my tail with one fool who can't understand a simple greenhouse, and another who can't understand that correct units are vital in physics. Makes me wonder what your particular issue will be (other than calling all the science I'll show you "religion" I already know that is a major misunderstanding on your part).

For starters, do you know of any recent compilation of Seitz's views? For the Oregon Petition, the only part he did was the cover letter. It lends his general support, but I would not take that to mean those are actually all his views. He did not write any of the "research" papers. Those where Arthurs, his son, and some astrophysicists. No climate folks, as expected. It was also 10 years ago.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext