Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Right Wing Extremist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (11131)	7/5/2001 6:36:16 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 59480

Karen, I see nothing silly or wrong in mentioning that 17 thousand scientists have signed a petition denouncing global warming. And I find it astonishing that you would. Michael, I'm just sick to death of that list and I really don't want to go another round on it. That list does absolutely nothing to inform the discussion of global warming. The signatures on the list are, assuming that they're legitimate, of people with BS degrees in some field of science. Who knows if they know anything about the subject? A BS in science, even a relevant field of science, won't even get you considered for an entry level position at EPA. I'm not trying to argue global warming with you, Michael. I have no expertise nor position on that subject. I'm only pointing out that your list doesn't shed any light on the subject. I don't believe the issue is about Stossel's reporting, as much is it about your disagreeing with his analysis and perspective. I'm not taking issue with Stossel's perspective, only his analysis. I have often argued on these boards, as Stossel did in his ABC piece, that the public isn't rational in its assessment of risk. (In this case he challenged the public's assessment of environmental risk as well as the risk from consuming genetically engineered foods and from producing scientifically enhanced offspring.) My concern is disinformation regardless of the source or the subject. You posted a speech that he had made that contained at least one piece of disinformation. Since I was in a position to speak with authority on that point, I posted to correct the record. My SI hobby horses are civility and critical thinking. You and I have exchanged numerous posts on the latter. IMO, too many people applaud anything published that supports their POV, whether or not it is accurate or logical. I think that advocates who make over-the-top statements, in addition to lowering the general quality of discourse, are doing their causes no favor in the long run. Karen