====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
Louis wrote: > It is instead about the *basic* question whether climate change is being > impacted by greenhouse gases to disastrous effect on people and other > living beings. I can't answer that question unless you specify what you mean by 'disastrous'. It's one of those flexible words. Do you mean more disastrous than poverty, war, unemployment, discrimination, lack of pensions and healthcare? How would you or anyone else prove that? Tom said: "But we still trust science overall". I do too. But, overall, science does not justify the overblown catastrophic claims we are hearing from some environmentalists. Shane wrote: > Yet Paula gets her knickers in a twist denouncing Lester Brown for > making the perfectly accurate statement that "In recent years, > Himalayan glaciers have been retreating at rates ranging from 10 to 60 > meters per year." I did not denounce Lester Brown at all, and I was not referring to that statement. I was referring to Brown's phrase 'As the glaciers disappear'. Kindly untwist your own knickers. Darrel asked if I agree with Monbiot on this (for example): > On the other side of the debate, people are in denial not only about the > science of climate change but also about manipulation and deception by > other climate change deniers. They stoutly ignore far graver evidence of > falsification and fabrication by their own side, even when there is > smoking gun evidence that their champions have secretly taken money from > fossil fuel companies to make false claims. They make no attempt to hold > each other to account or to sustain any standards of truth at all. Since you ask - I don't agree with Monbiot that there are two sides to the debate. I don't agree with his misleading and insulting label 'climate change deniers'. On this issue there are many shades of opinion. But I do agree with other things Monbiot says. I don't feel myself obliged to absolutely agree or disagree with any one article or writer. Shane wrote: >Don't you realize that for Real Scientists (like Paula and the Murdoch >press) anecdotal evidence doesn't count? Quite right, anecdotal evidence cannot settle this issue. And it's truly embarrassing to see the right pose as the champions of public skepticism while the left dangles from the environmentalists' coat-tails. Paula ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: [email protected] Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
