<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>
The discussion devolved to the point where it wasn't of any value. Start a new thread and hopefully it will stay on topic. :-)<br><br><div><div id="SkyDrivePlaceholder"></div><hr id="stopSpelling">Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 22:11:25 -0700<br>From: godshatter@yahoo.com<br>To: moscowcares@moscow.com<br>CC: vision2020@moscow.com<br>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Institute for Public Accuracy: "Media Miss theForest for the Burning Trees"<br><br>
<div class="ecxmoz-cite-prefix"><br>
Does anyone, other than Gary, remember me saying that the world is
likely warming? And that it's mainly the amount that is man-made
and the sign of the likely feedbacks that is at issue? Gary seems
to have read enough of my posts to remember this, everyone else
just makes shit up that they think I believe, I guess.<br>
<br>
Paul<br>
<br>
On 07/09/2012 08:56 PM, Moscow Cares wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:708FB7E3-4C89-455D-AB25-0A1C19CE345F@moscow.com">
<div>Courtesy of the National Weather Service at:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<a href="http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/2012/6/supplemental/page-6/" target="_blank">http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/2012/6/supplemental/page-6/</a>
<div>
<div>-----------------------------------</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="ecxsection-title" style="font-weight:bold;font-size:1.1em;color:rgb(0, 0, 136);font-family:sans-serif">Warmest 12-month consecutive periods for the CONUS</div>
<p style="font-size:1em;text-align:justify;line-height:1.4em;font-weight:normal;font-family:sans-serif">These are the warmest 12-month periods on record
for the contiguous United States. During the June 2011-June
2012 period, each of the 13 months ranked among the warmest
third of their historical distribution for the first time in
the 1895-present record. The odds of this occurring randomly
is 1 in 1,594,323. The July 2011-June 2012 12-month period
surpassed the June 2011-May 2012 period as the warmest
consecutive 12-months that the contiguous U.S. has
experienced.</p>
<div>-----------------------------------</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Care to elaborate on your claim concerning the late 1980s,
Mr. Falen?<br>
<br>
<div>Seeya round town, Moscow.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Tom Hansen</div>
<div>Moscow, Idaho</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>"If not us, who?</div>
<div>If not now, when?"</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>- Unknown</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
On Jul 9, 2012, at 20:45, lfalen <a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com"><lfalen@turbonet.com></a>
wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote>
<div><span>You may teach logic, but your arguments nmake no
sense to me.</span><br>
<span>Roger</span><br>
<span>-----Original message-----</span><br>
<span>From: Joe Campbell <a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com">philosopher.joe@gmail.com</a></span><br>
<span>Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 20:23:55 -0700</span><br>
<span>To: lfalen <a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</a></span><br>
<span>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Institute for Public
Accuracy: "Media Miss theForest for the Burning Trees"</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<blockquote><span>Roger,</span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Here's a little logic lesson
at no charge.</span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Arguments are valid or invalid
depending on their formal structure.</span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><span>You gave an argument. I
provided another absurd argument -- by your</span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><span>own admission -- that had the
same structure. Thus, your argument was</span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><span>absurd, as well. It is called
"providing a counterexample."</span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Best, Joe</span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><span>On Jul 9, 2012, at 7:59 PM,
lfalen <a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com"><lfalen@turbonet.com></a> wrote:</span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Your statement on $100 makes
no sense. I should have elaborated more on science.
The way science works to to criticize,review and
attempt to duplicate. A case in point of not doing
this is Wakefields's research. Look ant the problems
accepting that research caused.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Roger</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>-----Original message-----</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>From: Joe Campbell
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com">philosopher.joe@gmail.com</a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2012
23:05:39 -0700</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>To: lfalen
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Subject: Re: [Vision2020]
Institute for Public Accuracy: "Media Miss the Forest
for the Burning Trees"</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Ok Roger. You owe me $100.
Don't be too hard on me. After all, I'm just a
skeptic. Whether you owe it to me is subject to
debate, at least according to me. If you're a
critical thinker, you'll pay up. So pay up.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>These arguments don't work
on debt, and there is no reason to think they work
on the environment either. What matters is the
evidence. My point is, in most cases non-scientists
are not in a position to say. I won't care what Paul
says about this issue until he publishes a paper on
the topic in a peer-reviewed journal. You can
believe what you wish.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>If your doctor tells you
something, and 90% of the other doctors say the same
thing, yet Paul tells you something different, whom
do you believe? Paul? Because medicine is uncertain?</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Nonsense. You trust the
doctors because they are the experts. What makes
climate science different?</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Joe</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>On Jul 8, 2012, at 9:36
PM, lfalen <a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com"><lfalen@turbonet.com></a> wrote:</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>You guys are being too
hard on Paul. While there is climate change, the
full effects and causes are subject to debate and
critical review. You tout critical thinking. That
is all Paul is doing. To blandly accept every
thing that is put out by Climate Scientists is not
engaging in critical thinking.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Roger</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>-----Original
message-----</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>From: Joe Campbell
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com">philosopher.joe@gmail.com</a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2012
17:49:43 -0700</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>To: Paul Rumelhart
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">godshatter@yahoo.com</a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Subject: Re:
[Vision2020] Institute for Public Accuracy: "Media
Miss the Forest for the Burning Trees"</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>I'm not criticizing
criticism and debate. I'm criticizing you; we're
debating. I'll respond to the longer post later.
Joe</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>On Jul 8, 2012, at
4:40 PM, Paul Rumelhart
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com"><godshatter@yahoo.com></a> wrote:</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Does "validly
express one's positions on the findings of
science" equate to "conform to the scientific
consensus"? Is there no room for criticism
and debate?</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Paul</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>On 07/08/2012 11:10
AM, Sam Scripter wrote:</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Good post, Joe!</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>I appreciate the
"pains"/time/effort you take to carefully,
fully explain your points about how to
validly express one's position on the
findings of science.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Thank you!</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Sam S</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>-------- Original
message --------</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Subject: Re:
[Vision2020] Institute for Public Accuracy:
"Media Miss the Forest for the Burning
Trees"</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>From: Joe Campbell
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com"><philosopher.joe@gmail.com></a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>To: Paul Rumelhart
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com"><godshatter@yahoo.com></a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>CC: Moscow Vision
2020 <a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><vision2020@moscow.com></a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Two other points
worth making.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>First, you would
come off as something other than a spokesman
for a</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>radical,
ill-informed, politically motivated position
if your</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>criticisms went
both ways. You like to point out "flaws" in
climate</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>science. But are
there no flaws in the arguments of their
detractors?</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>No fallacies, no
prejudices, no false reports, no political</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>motivations?
Doubtful.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Second, in your
initial post, at the bottom of this one, you
list</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>several complaints
about the political motivations lurking
behind</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>climate science.
But this makes it seem as if climate science
is</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>somehow separated
from the rest of science and the academy and
nothing</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>can be further
from the truth.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>At WSU, climate
scientists work within the School of Earth
and</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Environmental
Sciences (SEES), which is made up of
scientists from a</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>multitude of
disciplines such as geology, geochemistry,
ecology,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>hydrology,
microbiology, and marine biology. Were you
to poll these</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>folks -- indeed,
were you to poll scientists in general --
you'd find</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>that there is an
overwhelming consensus among them about the
impact of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>human behavior on
global warming. Thus, if we are to believe
your</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>reports of bias
among climate scientists, the conspiracy
would be more</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>widespread than
you suggest, involving not just climate
scientists but</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>the entire
scientific community, perhaps all of the
academy. In the</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>end, we're left
with a fairytale conspiracy theory that is</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>preposterous and
unbelievable.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Just to note one
example, you constantly complain about
problems with</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>computer models
when making large-scale claims about global
climate</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>change but did you
know that these models are used in other
areas of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>science as well? A
quick scan of some of the research interests
of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>members of SEES
makes the point. One professor's "research
uses</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>computer
simulation models to help us understand the
recent problems</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>in the electric
power industry." Another "combines field
measurements</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>with theoretical
models and computer simulations to shed
light on</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>natural water
flows, mixing, and sediment transport." This
is research</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>that is funded by
competitive national grants and provides
information</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>that is actually
used to solve real-world problems. Why not</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>investigate
whether or not your worries about computer
models apply to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>these areas of
research as well? The flip-side is, don't
you think</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>that these
scientists would all be standing up on their
soapboxes</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>deriding the
claims of climate scientists if their work
were as biased</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>and fallacious as
you contend that it is? Don't you think
they'd want</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>to separate their
research from the disreputable research of
climate</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>scientists if that
work were as questionable as you contend?
Again, if</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>we are to believe
any of your claims, the political conspiracy
would</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>be very wide, so
wide as to involve the whole of the academy.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>As the Director of
the School of Politics, Philosophy, and
Public</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Affairs, I have a
keen interest in the connections between
science,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>ethics, and
policy: How can we take the information that
science</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>provides and apply
it to the real world in a way that is
beneficial to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>humanity and the
universe in general? Last year we started a
series of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>lectures in an
attempt to help the general public better
understand</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>complex issues
like global warming, bringing together
experts from a</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>variety of fields
for public forums at least once a semester.
Last</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>spring we brought
in Andrew Light, a Senior Fellow at the
Center for</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>American Progress,
and formed a panel discussion with
representatives</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>from biochemistry,
sociology, and philosophy to provide
information on</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>this very topic.
After brief presentations from the
panelists, there</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>was a Q&A
where folks were allowed to ask questions
and voice concerns</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>about these
matters. I advertised this on Vision 2020.
This is not the</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>behavior of people
who have an agenda that they want to trick
you into</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>believing.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>This year we
promise to have more events. I'm in the
process of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>organizing a
conference on neurophilosophy, investigating
the impact</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>of neuroscience on
such areas as ethics and the law, and we're
also</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>inviting Allen
Buchanan, James B. Duke Professor of
Philosophy at Duke</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>University, who
will likely give a talk on bioethics. I'll
continue to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>advertise these
events on Vision 2020 and I encourage you
and others</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>to attend. In
general, I encourage you, Paul, to seek out
local</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>presentations by
climate scientists -- I've helped organize
at least 3</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>such events over
the last 3 years -- and to ask questions
directly to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>the scientists
themselves and see if they might be able to
respond to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>your concerns. In
other words, instead of voicing your
concerns to a</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>group with no
expertise that is unable to evaluate the
merits of your</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>claims, take them
to the climate scientists themselves and see
what</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>they say. And do
it in a public venue. That way, folks would
be able</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>to here both sides
of the issue and make a more informed
decision.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Best, Joe</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>On Sat, Jul 7,
2012 at 10:21 PM, Paul Rumelhart
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com"><godshatter@yahoo.com></a> wrote:</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Can I assume you
have credentials in climate science?
Because, otherwise,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>you are being
hypocritical in calling me out for
"degrading" the</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>conversation
because of my lack of the same.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Perhaps I'm
missing some fundamental knowledge of how
arguments work.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Paul</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>________________________________</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>From: Ted
Moffett <a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com"><starbliss@gmail.com></a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>To: Joe Campbell
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com"><philosopher.joe@gmail.com></a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Cc: Moscow
Vision 2020 <a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><vision2020@moscow.com></a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Sent: Saturday,
July 7, 2012 2:03 PM</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Subject: Re:
[Vision2020] Institute for Public
Accuracy: "Media Miss the</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Forest for the
Burning Trees"</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Thanks for these
comments phrased in a manner so easy to
understand, coming</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>from someone who
could write at a level that would be
obtuse for many. I'm</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>reminded of the
writing style of philosopher Bertrand
Russell</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>When in a dialog
someone of a significant level of
education and</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>intelligence
repeatedly refuses to admit when it is
pointed out that they</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>have engaged in
significant omissions, errors and
misrepresentations</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>regarding a
critical scientific field, and promotes
what can be easily</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>determined by
most anyone doing cursory research of
scientific peer review,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>to be junk
science, as though we are supposed to take
it seriously, this</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>implies a
factual and/or argumentative filter at
work, for whatever reason</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>or reasons.
Call it a indication of an "agenda," or
who knows what it is!</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Maybe there is
still some social value to such a degraded
dialog, but it</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>ceases to offer
significant credible factual or
augmentative input of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>interest for
someone who reaches a certain level of
competency in exploring</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>the scientific
field involved.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>On the issue of
complexity as an argument for a high
degree of skepticism</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>about the claims
of a given field of knowledge, the human
brain/mind is</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>claimed by some
to be the most complex object in the known
universe,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>therefore we
should engage in a high degree of
skepticism about any claims</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>by anyone about
any ones state of "mind," whether
scientific claims or other</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>sorts. It
amazes me that people make such simple and
easy judgements about</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>each others
state of mind, given that such
propositions to be credible</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>should only be
made by those with PhDs in a psychology or
perhaps</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>neurobiology
related field, and even these judgements
it can be argued are</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>very open to
question, assuming a vast complexity is
underpinning each</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>humans state of
mind.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Consider this
dialog with neuroscientist Michael
Gazzaniga:</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>ALAN ALDA
INTERVIEWS MICHAEL GAZZANIGA</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Featured on "The
Man with Two Brains,"</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>from the
SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN FRONTIERS special
"Pieces of Mind."</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span><a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.longwood.k12.ny.us/lhs/science/mos/mind/algazzin.htm" target="_blank">http://www.longwood.k12.ny.us/lhs/science/mos/mind/algazzin.htm</a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Alan Alda:</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>I have to say -
and from talking to you I think you feel
this way, too -</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>consciousness is
a terrific thing to have. It feels good to
have</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>consciousness.
When you lose consciousness and when you
sense you're going</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>to lose
consciousness, it doesn't feel good. You
get a little nervous about</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>that. But what
do you suppose is the reason we have
consciousness? Why has</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>it persisted?
What good is it in terms of the survival
of the species?</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Michael
Gazzaniga:</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>That's related
to the $64,000 question. What's it for? If
you want to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>understand
anything, you've got to know what it's
for. And it so permeates</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>every thought we
have, you think, well, it's for keeping us
motivated, to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>have these
thoughts, or whatever. But you start to
put this stuff down on</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>paper and it
just doesn't look like you're saying much.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>You know,
there's a bunch of philosophers now who
are saying, "A human</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>trying to
understand consciousness is like a
nematode trying to understand a</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>dog." It's just
too big a problem, and they kind of toss
it out the window.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Well I don't
think we should do that. Clearly, it's
going to take a lot of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>major new
thinking to really give us an insight, a
handle on how we can</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>scientifically
talk about this phenomenal awareness that
we all experience.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>-------------------------------------------</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Vision2020 Post:
Ted Moffett</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>On Thu, Jul 5,
2012 at 8:57 AM, Joe Campbell
<philosopher.joe@gmailcom></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>wrote:</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>I'm making
claims about your arguments and</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>when it comes to
judgments about the strengths and
weaknesses of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>arguments -- the
area of logic and the broader area of
epistemology --</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>there is NO ONE
living on the Palouse who is more
qualified than I am</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>(although there
are a few people who are as qualified).</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Paul,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Thanks for
helping me to make my case!</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>The point is
that you DON'T believe that smoking causes
lung cancer on</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>the basis of
scientific evidence that you understand
and evaluate,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>because you are
not a scientist. You believe it because it
is "common</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>sense" (which is
irrelevant, for it merely boils down to
the fact that</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>it seems to you
to be true) and because the experts tell
you it is</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>true. You still
haven't shown a difference between the
case of smoking</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>and human carbon
consumption. Let's look more closely at
some of the</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>BAD arguments
you give below for the supposed
difference.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Two
clarifications first. My point was that
unless you are an actual</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>scientist, it is
almost impossible to make judgments about
scientific</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>claims on
evidence alone. In most cases,
understanding the evidence</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>would require a
high level of expertise. This is why
scientific</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>beliefs should
be based on testimony, the testimony of
experts in the</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>field. My
general claim was that there is NO basis
to dismiss one set</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>of scientists
(climate scientists, say) yet not dismiss
others as</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>well. In my
previous post, I happened to mention
scientists who</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>specialize in
lung cancer research but below I mention
others since</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>they are helpful
in showing flaws in your reasoning.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Also, you might
wonder how I'm qualified to speak about
such matters,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>given that I'm
not a climate scientist either. But I'm
not making any</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>claims about the
climate. I just trust what the climate
scientists</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>tell me for
reasons given. I'm making claims about
your arguments and</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>when it comes to
judgments about the strengths and
weaknesses of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>arguments -- the
area of logic and the broader area of
epistemology --</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>there is NO ONE
living on the Palouse who is more
qualified than I am</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>(although there
are a few people who are as qualified).</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>The points in
(1) are irrelevant and were addressed
above. In the</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>1950s smoking
seemed to be a healthy activity and was
promoted as</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>such. Common
sense turned out to be wrong. Common sense
is never a</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>reason for
holding scientific beliefs.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Wrt (2), I'd be
willing to bet that there are climate
scientists</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>working on these
very questions. In any event, I'm not sure
what</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>evidence you
have to say otherwise. I tend to leave it
to scientists</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>to determine
what kinds of studies they should or
shouldn't be</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>concerned with
in order to support their claims. Since
you are not a</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>scientist, these
points are meaningless.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>For point (3),
it is true that the climate is complex.
But the</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>universe is even
MORE complex. To the extent that this
gives you a</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>reason to
dismiss climate science it should give you
EVEN MORE reason</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>to dismiss all
of physics for both the micro-level of the
universe and</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>the macro-level
of the universe are FAR MORE complex than
the earth's</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>climate. This is
just a general skeptical argument that
applies to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>almost ANY area
of science. Why accept it wrt climate
science but not,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>say, cosmology?
Why believe anything that Stephen Hawking
says, for</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>instance? Do you
know how much MORE complicated the whole
frickin'</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>universe is when
compared with the earth's climate? This is
an absurd,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>BAD, and
irresponsible argument.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>I've responded
to arguments like those in (4) and (5)
before but it</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>hasn't seemed to
sink in yet. Whether or not a scientist
has an agenda</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>is IRRELEVANT.
What matters is the EVIDENCE he or she has
in support</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>of the claims
made. Suppose you find out that 99% of
scientists who</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>study the links
between smoking and lung cancer went into
the field</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>for emotional
and irrational reasons -- suppose, say,
that members of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>their family
died of lung cancer. That would be
irrelevant and</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>shouldn't cause
you to dismiss their findings. ALL that is
relevant is</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>the
epistemological quality of the evidence,
which can be judged in</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>objective ways.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>If your argument
were sound, it should give people reason
to dismiss</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>EVERYTHING you
say because you clearly have an agenda.
You can't tell</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>me that your
concern with the issue of global warming
is independent</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>of your
political views or your personal habits,
that it is solely</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>motivated by the
desire for objective truth and nothing
more. This</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>very argument
undermines everything you say on Vision
2020 since all</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>of it is in
keeping with your own political
viewpoints, or "agenda."</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>But people
shouldn't dismiss your views merely
because you happen to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>be interested in
politics. They should judge your views on
the basis</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>of the evidence
you provide in support of the claims that
you make.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>They shouldn't
make sweeping generalizations about your
claims either;</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>they should
evaluate each argument individually.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>If your argument
were sound, we should dismiss ALL sciences
related to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>human heath,
since they are all motivated by the
subjective desire to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>help human
beings extend their lives and improve the
quality of their</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>lives. Likely
anyone working in the area of cancer
research is</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>motivated in
part by the selfish desire to become THE
person that</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>finds the cure
for cancer. That is irrelevant. This is
another general</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>skeptical
argument that (if sound) should cause you
to dismiss much</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>more than
climate science.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>ALL scientific
claims should be judged by the merits of
the evidence</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>given. Personal
facts about the scientists are ALWAYS
IRRELEVANT.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>People tend to
choose their vocations for personal
reasons, not</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>because of a
desire to seek objective truth. Scientists
are no</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>different in
this regard.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Best, Joe</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>On Wed, Jul 4,
2012 at 7:16 PM, Paul Rumelhart
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com"><godshatter@yahoo.com></a> wrote:</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>On 07/03/2012
05:42 PM, Joe Campbell wrote:</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>So, Paul,
why believe that smoking causes lung
disease if you don't</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>believe that
human carbon consumption has an impact
on global warming?</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Joe</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>First, I'm not
saying that carbon consumption is not
having an impact on</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>global
warming. I'm saying that the size of
the impacts compared to the</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>more-or-less
unknown natural factors is unknown and
that the feedbacks</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>from</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>warming in
general are unknown, among other things.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>There are
plenty of reasons, both scientific and
not, that make me</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>skeptical</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>of global
warming. Although everyone will assume
I'm just grasping at</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>straws because
of my deep-seated urge to deny
everything (probably has to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>do</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>with my
relationship with my mother), I humbly
present a smattering of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>them</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>for your
enjoyment:</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>1. On the
face of it, the idea is extraordinary.
Humans, even with our</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>vaunted
civilization, are small potatoes
compared to the forces of nature.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>The only
reason our carbon footprint even makes a
dent compared to natural</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>forces has to
do with the small amount of CO2 in our
atmosphere. We've</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>had</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>far less of an
impact on the water cycle, for example,
or with oxygen</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>levels. Not
saying that it isn't possible, but there
is automatically a</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>bar</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>that has to be
gotten over which smoking causing lung
disease doesn't</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>have.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>It should be
common sense that inhaling smoke
multiple times a day for</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>years</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>can have a
deleterious effect on the lungs, even
without bringing in</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>carcinogens.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>2. There are
some obvious questions that aren't being
answered because of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>the focus on
human impacts. For example, what caused
the earth to heat up</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>immediately
following the Little Ice Age? If we do
not know, how can we</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>say</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>with any
confidence that human-induced climate
change is to blame instead</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>the same
natural processes still at work? What
causes an ice age to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>start,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>and what
brings us out of one?</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>3. The
climate is complex, with multiple
feedbacks of unknown strength</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>and</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>unknown
feedbacks of unknown strength. The sign
of the combination of</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>feedbacks
isn't even known. Climate models cannot
be that accurate, given</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>the above, yet
they are seen as gospel. Even when they
make different</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>assumptions
and model things different ways. As
long as they project a</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>warmer future,
they are added to the model average and
used as proof that</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>global warming
will kill babies and cause frogs to rain
from the sky.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>I imagine that
the mechanisms for lung disease from
tobacco are relatively</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>straight
forward.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>4. Some of
the major players in the spotlight on
the side of global</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>warming</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>are
environmental activists with an agenda,
as opposed to being objective</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>scientists
just following the data. For example,
Timothy Wirth (Senator</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>from Colorado
and leader of the negotiating team for
the Kyoto treaty)</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>held</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>a hearing on
global warming at the capital. He
called the Weather Bureau</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>find out what
day of the year was usually the hottest
in DC, and scheduled</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>the hearing
for that date. His team then went in
the night before the</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>hearing and
opened all the windows in the room in
which the hearing was to</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>be held,
causing the air conditioning to fail to
keep up with the heat>> >>
All</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>so that it
could be hot and muggy when James Hansen
gave his spiel about</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>the</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>dangers of
global warming.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>(<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hotpolitics/interviews/wirthhtml" target="_blank">http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hotpolitics/interviews/wirthhtml</a>)</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>The
anti-tobacco campaigns, with all their
sheer propaganda, do seem to be</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>run by
political activists, but that may be
coincidental.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>5. Major
climate scientists also appear to have
political
agendas>>>>>>>>
Michael</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Mann and his
"hockey stick" come to mind, trying to
erase the Medieval</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Warm</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Period and the
Little Ice Age, using dubious
statistics, all so they could</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>show that
current warming was "unprecedented". All
this from a few</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>bristlecone
pine trees.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>I haven't
heard of any of these kinds of
shenanigans from scientists</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>studying the
link between tobacco use and lung
diseases, probably because</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>the links were
relatively straight forward. Not so
much the case with</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>global warming
/ global climate change / global climate
disruption>>>>>>>></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>There are
more, but that gives you the gist of it.
But hey, it's just me</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>being
contrarian, right? So please, move
along. Nothing to see here.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>Paul</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>=======================================================</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>List services
made available by First Step Internet,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fsr.net" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>=======================================================</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>=======================================================</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>List services made
available by First Step Internet,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fsr.net" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>=======================================================</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>=======================================================</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>List services made
available by First Step Internet,</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fsr.net" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span>=======================================================</span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote><span></span><br>
</blockquote>
<span></span><br>
<span>=======================================================</span><br>
<span> List services made available by First Step Internet,</span><br>
<span> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.</span><br>
<span> <a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fsr.net" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a></span><br>
<span> <a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a></span><br>
<span>=======================================================</span><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="ecxmimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fsr.net" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a>
<a class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a>
=======================================================</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<br>=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
http://www.fsr.net
mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
=======================================================</div> </div></body>
</html>