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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (22928)	7/5/2006 5:38:23 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541326

Well, and hello to you, Mary. You are right. She is wrong. One of the things that makes this conversation so odd is that both of us think we are arguing for common sense. For the life of me, I cannot see how anyone could take any other position than the one that says you have to mobilize the political before you can get anything done. It's nice and important to have "solutions" on the shelf before and during that process, but they are likely to only faintly resemble the solutions which show up at the end. And none that are conceived without political support will ever have the proverbial change of a snowball in wherever. And, apparently, Karen feels precisely the opposite. Well. . . . .

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (22928)	7/5/2006 5:59:52 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541326

You are right. She is wrong. How about the real point Karen keeps making, which is that she's already living more environmentally consciously than Gore and many of his advocates and has been doing so for years, but doesn't see how it's changed anything? If there's anything more action that you can ask of any one person than that their lives be conducted conscientiously with respect to the environment, what is it? If you live Green but doubt Gore, where's the wrong?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (22928)	7/5/2006 6:58:59 PM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541326

we have to take the course you advocate. Your solution has a chance to work. She offers nothing. Pretty much sums it up. And while some people wait for conclusive, non-ambiguous, less partisan, accepted-by-all proof that the world isn't flat, the rest of us better get on working with the sphere. OK, OK, it's an oblate sphere. But that's still a better model than a plane disc. Just as anthropogenic warming caused principally by CO2 emissions unbalanced by anything in nature is a better model than... well, than the near-complete lack of an alternative model produced by the sceptics. I haven't seen a convincing alternate from our modern-day flat-earthers. Occasionally we get comments like 'well, it was warmer 50000 years ago, and there was more CO2 in the atmosphere during the Jurassic era'. Both true; and 50,000 years ago the Thames was a subtropical swamp valley, and in the Jurassic era England and most of the rest of the world was under 50m of water and laying down limestone. AS for arguing that someone (engineers? politicians? whoever?) need to come up with a total fix, and because they can't right now there's no point in trying... well, in Babbage's day they couldn't built a computer capable of billions of calculations per second, either. But step by step, we got there. However I have given up trying to hammer reality into the eyes of the wilfully blind. I'll just get on and wait for their own children to condemn them, or an uncaring world to disown them.