[Vision2020] Oktoberfest (was: heat wave)

[Donovan Arnold]

What 90% of scientists have proved would reduce global warming and pollution, in the time frame of ASAP.
 
Donovan J. Arnold

From: Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com>
To: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com; chasuk at gmail.com 
Cc: viz <vision2020 at moscow.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 10:36 AM
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Oktoberfest (was: heat wave)


Donovan write 'We should demand action to stop the destruction of the planet.'

What specific action do you think should be curtailed / stopped and within what timeframe?

-Scott


Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:32:24 -0700
From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
To: chasuk at gmail.com
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Oktoberfest (was: heat wave)


Chas writes,
 
"Global warming is a scientific question, and even the scientists are
divided. Shouldn't that tell the rest of us to shut up? Of course it
should, but that isn't going to happen."

Yeah, they are divided about global warming 97% to 3%, with the 3% mostly getting paychecks from the companies that are doing the polluting.

No, we should not shut up. We should demand action to stop the destruction of the planet. We should be as noisy, as loud, in every face, and as obnoxious as possible. Waiting until the very last scientist to give into what the 97% have accepted as fact will be too late for the planet and us.

I don't claim to have a strong grasp of the science behind global warming. I only claim that I have a grasp of common sense to accept what those that do say, and to take it seriously when they mean it to be. 

Donovan J. Arnold
From: Chasuk <chasuk at gmail.com>
To: Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> 
Cc: Kenneth Marcy <kmmos1 at frontier.com>; Vision2020 discussions <vision2020 at moscow.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Oktoberfest (was: heat wave)

I wrote this for other purposes, but it seemed relevant here:

Stupidity of the Global Warming Debate, and the Catastrophe of Ignorance

Within these paragraphs, I'm not going to debate the reality, the
falsehood, or the effects of global warming. Instead, I'm going to
discuss the stupidity typical of those arguments.

Global warming is either occurring or it isn't, and personal opinion
isn't going to change that. If it is occurring, are we causing it? No
one knows, regardless of what we may assert or deny.

Global warming is a scientific question, and even the scientists are
divided. Shouldn't that tell the rest of us to shut up? Of course it
should, but that isn't going to happen.

The majority of us like to express our opinions. We like to express
them most about those topics that are continually in the news,
especially when our peers have no qualifications to refute us.
So we debate among ourselves, goaded on by the mainstream media. This
has the effect of pitting us against scientists.

Bill Maher perfectly summarizes the humor in this situation:

"Mainstream media, could you please stop pitting the ignorant versus
the educated, and framing it as a debate?"

If Bush Believed

Ask yourself this:

If George W. Bush had cajoled incessantly about the evils of global
warming, would more conservatives believe in it?

Be honest in your answer.

What if Sarah Palin were making Al Gore's speeches? Imagine that she
made his arguments in her folksy way, throwing in jokes about
"lamestream" media's gobal warming denial and the horrible effect of
global warming on Alaskan wildlife.

Would more conservatives believe?

If Obama suddenly expressed doubts, would liberals become the skeptics?

Even among the educated, the opinions largely follow political party lines.

According to a recent Gallup poll of university students, the chasm is
wide, with 74% of liberal believing in global warming, while only 30%
of conservatives do.

I suggest that this margin is more the result of herd mentality than
the critical thinking skills of either group.

What Should We Do?

We should stop being so dogmatic.

It isn't stupid to defend global warming. It isn't stupid to deny it.
However, it is stupid to claim certainty. Assuming that you have
absorbed all of the pros and cons of the global warming argument,
certainty still isn't yours to claim. Notice that it is usually the
most certain who use pejoratives like "warmist" and "denialist." Why
is it that those with the fewest doubts have the deepest need to call
others names?

http://chasuk.hubpages.com/hub/The-Stupidity-of-the-Global-Warming-Debate



======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com =======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20120711/e589eb44/attachment.html>