<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;"><DIV>Never underestimate the stupidity of humans. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Remember the joke in the 90s, they said more people believed in the existence of UFOs than the existence of their Social Security when they reached the age of retirement. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best Regards,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Donovan<BR><BR>--- On <B>Sat, 4/4/09, Joe Campbell <I><philosopher.joe@gmail.com></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid"><BR>From: Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe@gmail.com><BR>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Lies, Damn Lies And Science<BR>To: "Paul Rumelhart" <godshatter@yahoo.com><BR>Cc: "vision 2020" <vision2020@moscow.com><BR>Date: Saturday, April 4, 2009, 8:52 AM<BR><BR>
<DIV class=plainMail>The funny thing is that if you talk with scientists there really is no <BR>issue here. How did this get to be a "political" issue in the first <BR>case? Isn't it an empirical issue?<BR><BR>Joe Campbell<BR><BR>On Apr 4, 2009, at 8:39 AM, Paul <SPAN>Rumelhart</SPAN> <<A href="http://us.mc381.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=godshatter@yahoo.com" ymailto="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">godshatter@yahoo.com</A>> wrote:<BR><BR>> Great. Another excuse to cram it down our throats. I can't wait.<BR>><BR>> I don't know what the real answers are, but I do know that this topic<BR>> has been so politicized that it sickens me. It trips my "bullshit"<BR>> meter, and layers on an extra level of skepticism that I would <BR>> normally<BR>> not have had.<BR>><BR>> Paul<BR>><BR>> Ted Moffett wrote:<BR>>> Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett:<BR>>><BR>>> This article from EOS
('/Examining the Scientific consensus on <BR>>> Climate<BR>>> Change/', *Volume 90*, Number 3, 2009, available to American<BR>>> Geophysical Union members) which is quoted by Realclimate.org lower<BR>>> down and is available to the public at the website first below, <BR>>> claims<BR>>> that only 58 percent of the public in the US thinks that human<BR>>> activity is a significant contributing factor in changing the mean<BR>>> global temperature, as opposed to 97% of specialists surveyed. This<BR>>> is a very recent effort to quantify the scientific consensus on the<BR>>> validity of anthropogenic climate change and contrast this consensus<BR>>> with public opinion:<BR>>><BR>>> <A href="http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf" target=_blank>http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf</A><BR>>> <<A
href="http://tigger.uic.edu/%7Epdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf" target=_blank>http://tigger.uic.edu/%7Epdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf</A>><BR>>> ------------------------------<BR>>> <A href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/03/a-potentially-useful-book-lies-damn-lies-science/#more-661" target=_blank>http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/03/a-potentially-useful-book-lies-damn-lies-science/#more-661</A><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> 29 March 2009<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> A potentially useful book - Lies, Damn lies & Science<BR>>><BR>>> Filed under:<BR>>><BR>>> * Communicating Climate<BR>>> <<A href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/category/communicating-climate/" target=_blank>http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/category/communicating-climate/</A> <BR>>>
><BR>>><BR>>> — rasmus @ 1:26 PM<BR>>><BR>>> Lies, Damned Lies, and ScienceAccording to a recent article in Eos<BR>>> (Doran and Zimmermann<BR>>> <<A href="http://www.agu.org/journals/eo/eo0903/2009EO030002.pdf#anchor" target=_blank>http://www.agu.org/journals/eo/eo0903/2009EO030002.pdf#anchor</A>>,<BR>>> '/Examining the Scientific consensus on Climate Change/', *Volume <BR>>> 90*,<BR>>> Number 3, 2009; p. 22-23 - only available for AGU members *- <BR>>> update: a<BR>>> public link to the article is here<BR>>> <<A href="http://tigger.uic.edu/%7Epdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf" target=_blank>http://tigger.uic.edu/%7Epdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf</A>>*), about 58%<BR>>> of the general public in the US thinks that human activity is a<BR>>> significant contributing factor in changing the mean global<BR>>> temperature, as opposed to 97% of
specialists surveyed. The<BR>>> disproportion between these numbers is a concern, and one possible<BR>>> explanation may be that the science literacy among the general public<BR>>> is low. Perhaps Sherry Seethaler's new book /'Lies, Damn Lies, and<BR>>> Science'/ can be a useful contribution in raising the science <BR>>> literacy?<BR>>><BR>>> --- <BR>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>><BR>>> =======================================================<BR>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<BR>>> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A><BR>>> mailto:<A href="http://us.mc381.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Vision2020@moscow.com"
ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>> =======================================================<BR>><BR>><BR>> =======================================================<BR>> List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<BR>> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A><BR>> mailto:<A href="http://us.mc381.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>> =======================================================<BR><BR>=======================================================<BR>List services made available by First Step Internet, <BR>serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <BR>
<A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A> <BR> mailto:<A href="http://us.mc381.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></td></tr></table><br>