Platt, The idea that climate scientist are doing this for money, I find... um... what's that word? Specious? Yeah, I think that's the word.
I agree that it's immoral. Science, since it worships at the altar of "objectivity" is committing a grave sin with unaknowledged subjective desires driving it. But I don't think that money is the issue, anymore than money is the reason why certain philosophers (Pirsig and Royce) are rejected or suppressed. It's got to be more than mere money. It's power, status, prestige - yes. But something more too or why would so many scientists line up behind a rather bizarre idea with no logical foundation? One day they all got together and said, "Hey! I bet we could make a whole bunch of money and get Al Gore a Nobel prize, if we'd just fudge a little data and create a global warming scare." I don't think so. Its an interesting question tho. I'm looking forward to some of the responses to questions that are being brought to light. Hopefully they'll shed some light. Doubtful tho. Nothing is more clueless than unconscious metaphysics. On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 7:14 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Mark, > > Well said! Note how environmentalists plead for reasonableness while > at the same time prominent climate scientists manipulate temperature > data to support global warming and assure continuance of millions in > climate-change funding. > > Platt > > On 1 Dec 2009 at 21:07, markhsmit wrote: > > > > > > > Environmentalists v Capitalists? Hmm that is an interesting pair. > > I suppose capitalists is used in a derogatory fashion by those > > who went out and bought a computer to join in the forum. > > > > The problem that I have with some environmentalist is that they think > > they know the Truth. They are righteous and believe everyone > > should believe the way they do otherwise they are less than human. > > In this way, they try to control things the way they think is right. I > agree > > with Platt, that sometimes it is nice to see that they are just as > devious > > and manipulative as the rest of the evil capitalists. It is this > righteous > > sense of morality that many environmentalists have that somehow > > elevates them to a more religious level that is annoying. It is another > > PC abuse. > > > > Capitalists try to live well as best they know. They are a little > excessive > > perhaps and their infatuation with wealth is a bit annoying as well, but > to > > each his own. I am not going to force anyone to be a capitalist or > > a spiritualist, tell or force them how to live. We are not going to be > allowed > > to buy plasma TVs in California now because of somebody's opinion. > > What is that all about? Oh, saving the planet, but from what, our desire > to live > > as we want to? Couldn't have that, we are so stupid. > > > > We can no more control the fate of the planet than we can live under > > a dictatorship. It is all about control, not about concern. Best thing > > that happened for environmentalism is the recession. The deeper > > it goes, the more we save the planet. Best if the US just imploded. > > Reasonable environmentalism? That is an oxymoron. > > > > IMHO > > > > Mark > > 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/ > 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/
