Email address obfuscation in effect -- please
click here to turn it off.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
- To: MLUG Off-Topic Discussion <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Subject: Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] [POLITICS] Fox News and global warming
- From: Stephen Montgomery-Smith <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 16:50:24 -0500
- Delivery-date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 16:51:05 -0500
- Envelope-to: EMAIL:PROTECTED
- In-reply-to: <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- References: <EMAIL:PROTECTED> <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Reply-to: MLUG Off-Topic Discussion <EMAIL:PROTECTED>
- Sender: EMAIL:PROTECTED
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.4) Gecko/20070707 SeaMonkey/1.1.2
Jack Smith wrote:
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 15:42 -0500, Mike Miller wrote:
It is interesting that one network is playing such a strong role in
promoting distortions of science:
http://foxattacks.com/
Humans causing global warming is a theory, not a fact. A theory is
nothing more than an idea about how something happens or has happened.
It will be impossible to attribute climate change to any one cause as it
is impossible to have a control and it is also impossible to isolate the
system and test just one factor. Thus human-caused global warming will
never become more than a theory as we can never prove it. Theories are
just educated or semi-educated guesses and can and will be challenged
and attacked, simply because there's no way to prove the critic nor the
defender right or wrong.
The official position of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change) is that there is a 9 out of 10 chance that man's activities are
contributing noticeably to global warming. I personally feel that this
is a good assessment of where things stand - it is not a slam dunk
theory, but neither is it junk science. To present it as either extreme
is to do a disservice.
http://cfsf.missouri.edu/pages/WG1AR4_SPM_PlenaryApproved.pdf
There is more to science than laboratory experiments with controls, and
I do think that in the decades to come that our scientific abilities
will get to the point where we can make definitive judgments on the
issue - we are just not there yet. In the mean time I think it would be
wise for us to make moderate efforts to cut back on our carbon dioxide
emission (and also I think that such cut backs will paradoxically
improve our economy, both because of the new innovation required, and
also because it will reduce our dependence on Middle Eastern oil), but I
don't think we need to be extremist environmentalists either.
Stephen
_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion