Hi Steve,

> >> [Platt]
> >> Looks like straw man set up to me.
> >>
> 
> Steve:
> James Hansen says he has been censored. You say "To state or imply  
> that advocates of global warming have been censored is absurd." Okay,  I
> will write him a letter and tell him that though he thinks he was  censored,
> he actually wasn't because that would be absurd. I'm sure  he'll be
> relieved.

For a guy whose complaints were written up in the NY Times, the Washington 
Post and broadcast on 60 minutes as well as many other liberal media 
outlets, the charge of censorship appears ludicrous.

> I now know that this didn't actually happen since you say it would be 
> absurd, but I hope we can agree hypothetically that if a scientist  had been
> asked by Congress to write a report for Congress on global  warming, and the
> message of the report he wrote was changed by non- scientist White House
> officials, it would be immoral. Thank goodness  that could never happen in
> our country.

Hypothetically I hope we can agree it's immoral for a scientist to skew 
data to fit a political agenda. 
 
> >> [Arlo]
> >> This was not what Steve suggested. What Steve pointed to was a very
> >> specific incident where the administration censored the work of
> >> scientists in order to change the outcome of the report. It did this not
> >> out "fairness in presenting both sides of an issue", but because it
> >> wanted the report to conform to its ideological stance, which  it did
> >> not.
> >>
> >> That is quite immoral, according to the MOQ.
> >
> 
> Platt:
> > Have you heard the administration's side of the story? I haven't.  
> > But intellectual
> > morality calls for all sides to be heard.
> 
> Steve:
> 60 minutes interviewed Hansen and sought a response from the  
> administration but 60 minutes was told that they would never get an  
> interview with them. Does that mean that we can never draw any  
> conclusions on the matter? (I found the interview on youtube with a  
> google search.)

Did 60 minutes mention that Hansen got $250,000 from the Heinz foundation, 
run by the wife of the liberal candidate for president, John Kerry?

Of course, you are free to draw whatever conclusions you wish. My own  
conclusion is that no administration, conservative or liberal,  is 
obligated to support dubious science. 

Regards,
Platt

Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to