Michael Foster wrote:
I think you guys missed my point. Whether you like it or not, mass
media reporters, politicians, and amateur environmentalists *are*
the environmental movement in the mind of the public.
I don't like it, but what can I do about it? Thanks to the mass
media, the public also thinks that cold fusion is pathological
science, and I can't do anything about that, either. The New York
Times doesn't answer my calls.
Their clownish antics will eventually discredit serious environmental efforts.
They already have discredited serious environmental efforts. Again,
what do you suggest we do about it? Al Gore doesn't answer my calls either.
I don't like Gore and never did, especially with regard to things
like ethanol. He & Clinton did nothing for the environment during the
administration. On the other hand, they did not hurt it as much as
Bush I and Bush II did. And I have to give Gore credit for raising
environmental concerns early and often, just as I give him credit for
helping to create the Internet -- which he actually did. See:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/200009/msg00052.html
A somewhat unreliable friend of mine claims he had a meeting with
Gore and he presented Gore with information on cold fusion. Gore
supposedly said "this is too hot, I can't do anything with it"
(meaning it is too controversial).
I hope the next administration introduces some sanity into the
ethanol debate, but the three of the candidates have not evinced any
knowledge about the subject yet. This administration is a dead loss,
and has been from day one.
- Jed
