Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] last days

["Bryan Venable" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

I think global warming is real, and a threat.  But a report on 20/20
isn't why I think so.  I think it's possible for them to be biased
*and* correct, and I think that's what happened here.  Remember that
reports on these shows are driven by producers, and they're authored
works in that sense.  They inevitably have a point of view.  That
doesn't mean the point of view is wrong, or misinformed.  But it's the
not the same thing as science.

I think the real question here is not about the reality of
global warming, it's whether global warming is the #1 threat to
humanity.  And to me that seems like a subjective question.  20/20's
producers think so, and maybe their report will convince a few people
that it is, and/or affirm a few people's pre-existing belief that it
is.  I happen to think that it is.  But that doesn't objectively make
it so.  If you could come up with strong evidence to support a
statistical analysis showing that global warming is the most likely
candidate for a threat that will cause the extinction of all humanity
sooner than any other threat, that might come close.  But even the best
statistical analysis can't predict the future, even though it could
give us somewhere to start in determining how to allocate resources for
disaster prevention.

So I don't think the ABC report really helps the cause of
convincing people to support using more of our resources to prevent
further global warming, is what I guess I'm trying to say.  It doesn't
help because it comes from the wrong place in the wrong way.  That's
how I look at it anyway.  I certainly hope I'm wrong.

On 9/6/06, Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED > wrote:

On Wed, 6 Sep 2006, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:

> Mike Miller wrote:
>> On Tue, 5 Sep 2006, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Miller wrote:
>>>
>>>>> http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2319986
>>>
>>>
>>>> Scientists they interviewed said that it is now established that
>>>> global warming is happening and that it is caused by human activity.
>>>> They also said that the dozen-or-so scientists who persist in making
>>>> claims to the contrary are no more credible than Holocaust deniers and
>>>> some of them are being paid to lie by the energy industry.
>>>
>>> While I'm not wishing to dispute the content of these statements,
>>> nevertheless I'm afraid that the argument "scientists appearing on ABC
>>> said so" doesn't help convince me.
>>
>> Fine.  Does "scientists said so" have no effect on you, or is the
>> involvement of ABC what concerns you.  Why in the world would ABC want
>> to bias their report?  I have no clue.
>
> Am I so predicatable that you can predict which of these two has no
> effect on me?

No.  I was asking -- I forgot to put a question mark after "concerns you."
My guess is that you think ABC can get scientist who will say whatever
they want to hear, but I think they are more honest than that.


>> Find one reputable scientist who says that human activity is having no
>> effect on global temperature.
>
> What part of "not wishing to dispute the content of these statements"
> don't you understand?

I don't know if you were referring to my statements or to the statements
of the scientists I was paraphrasing.

Mike

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion