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: Bearcatbob who wrote (51222)	3/1/2008 7:15:47 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 542967

In saying this I am using the argument of the GW alarmists that the tipping point is supposedly near. If it is near there is absolutely nothing that can be done now. If it is not near - then the alarmists are just that - alarmists. That is an odd argument: Either the alarmists are right so we can do nothing, or we have enough time to do something so the alarmists are wrong. If that is what you are really trying to say, than in your world view, there is never room for alarm? I'd say alarm is quite useful for motivating people to achieve things under duress which they would not achieve otherwise. In your view this is bad??

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (51222)	3/1/2008 8:26:51 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542967

If it is near there is absolutely nothing that can be done now. If it is not near - then the alarmists are just that - alarmists. I find this more than anticlimatic, Bob. So your position is that we should do nothing about GW. I gather you have dismissed all the arguments that say there is much that can be done before seminole goes underwater in Florida. ;-) I don't see anything particularly scientific in this argument, which is where I assumed all this questioning of credentials was meant to go. The argument is simply fatalistic. As for educational backgrounds, as I've typed here, I'm a retired academic, which is the volvo driving, chardonnay sipping, I forget how the rest goes, PhD crowd. And, worst of all, my PhD is in sociology. Can't get any worse can it? And since I absolutely loved college, found a home once I got there, there are several bachelors degrees wandering around in the background as well. I'm a bit of an overprepared escapee from Katelew's preferred world. But whichever world, it would seem, per simply human reasoning grounds, one would engage in probabilistic reasoning rather than binary logic. Of course, it's not possible to do that with GW with anything like precision. But the literature that Sam and others keep popping up here gives such. And comes with very large consensual consensus from the scientific community. I recommend that literature to you. It's very dense but I would not be surprised if it's one of the major political issues of the next presidency. At least, let's hope so.