Global Warming The debbil made me do it

Dan wrote in news:8d2a3003-7e26-4b20-b8fb-
:

On Mar 11, 8:52 am, "Dan Luke" wrote:

The American semi-educational system + religion + rightwing talk
radio.
It's a deadly combination.

He's a Creationist, too, bless his heart.

OK, this is a completely different topic than Global Warming, but
annoying in its own right.

You make statements like this and then wonder why no one wants to
engage you in "discussion."

I respectfully submit that there are many honorable people who do not
share your "opinion" on many topics -- religion, creation, global
warming, the role of science, and even politics, and that you betray
your own liberal virtues by dismissing such out of hand.


No one dismisses creationism as a possibility, its just that the
evidence for it is not there. Not even Chris Hutchins, richard Dawkins
or Jay Stephens say that it is impossible. What they do say is that the
evidence does not point to it in any way shape or form and that the
people trying to "prove" it's likely are beginnning with a premise and
trying to make the evidence fit that.
Similarly the evidence is pointing towards ecological messes of all
sorts from human activity. Looking at some in microcosm is an aid in
grasping the bigger picture. ( not that I think that anything I say is
going to make a blind bit of difference to anyoone who just doesn't want
to know) Anyhoo, for instance, the nile Perch was intrduced to Lake
Victoria years ago. The Nile Perch is a very big fish and very
nutritious. It can feed a lot of people. It was farmed in the lake for
the benefit of the local populace, but of course, some inevitably
escaped. The reproduced and thrived in the lake. The lake was previsouly
populated by small ciclids. Little 4-8 inch fish of various species that
have lived for millions of years in the lake and fill an ecological
niche that is as elegant as any to be found on the planet. The locals
have been fishing them for tens of thousands of years, too. They are
good eating and easy to prepare, only needing to be split in two and
died on a log in the sun.
Of course, the Nile Perch is thriving because it is eating all of these
little guys and the populations have been decimated. The locals, unable
to get a decent meal with a wading net, now have to fish the Perch,
whose numbers are also dpeleted because there aren't enough Ciclids to
keep them going. The Perch is a big greasy fish and needs to be cooked
over a fire, so there is now a new demand for firewood. Of course, being
tropical, the firewood is almost all slow growth hard wood so the
forests in the region of the lake ( which is bigger than most US states)
is dwindling partly because of this mess...
Just one more story. Of couse global warming will probably help these
people out in some way I haven't been able to imagine.

I'll leave hat invention up to Jay, eh?




Bertie

On Mar 11, 10:52 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

No one dismisses creationism as a possibility, its just that the
evidence for it is not there.

Reasonable people hardly ever dismiss everything out of hand.
Sloganeers and crusaders have to.

or Jay Stephens say that it is impossible. What they do say is that the
evidence does not point to it in any way shape or form and that the
people trying to "prove" it's likely are beginnning with a premise and
trying to make the evidence fit that.

I submit there's a corollary -- dismissing a premise because it
doesn't fit your cosmology/theology/philosophy.

Similarly the evidence is pointing towards ecological messes of all
sorts from human activity. Looking at some in microcosm is an aid in
grasping the bigger picture. ( not that I think that anything I say is
going to make a blind bit of difference to anyoone who just doesn't want
to know) Anyhoo, for instance, the nile Perch was intrduced to Lake
Victoria years ago. The Nile Perch is a very big fish and very
nutritious. It can feed a lot of people. It was farmed in the lake for
the benefit of the local populace, but of course, some inevitably
escaped. The reproduced and thrived in the lake. The lake was previsouly
populated by small ciclids. Little 4-8 inch fish of various species that
have lived for millions of years in the lake and fill an ecological
niche that is as elegant as any to be found on the planet. The locals
have been fishing them for tens of thousands of years, too. They are
good eating and easy to prepare, only needing to be split in two and
died on a log in the sun.
Of course, the Nile Perch is thriving because it is eating all of these
little guys and the populations have been decimated. The locals, unable
to get a decent meal with a wading net, now have to fish the Perch,
whose numbers are also dpeleted because there aren't enough Ciclids to
keep them going. The Perch is a big greasy fish and needs to be cooked
over a fire, so there is now a new demand for firewood. Of course, being
tropical, the firewood is almost all slow growth hard wood so the
forests in the region of the lake ( which is bigger than most US states)
is dwindling partly because of this mess...
Just one more story. Of couse global warming will probably help these
people out in some way I haven't been able to imagine.

I'll leave hat invention up to Jay, eh?

Bertie

We've seen species introduced worldwide with concomitant ecological
imbalances -- witness Starlings, English Sparrows, and Lake trout (you
must kill them in Yellowstone -- or be fined).

The underlying premise when these things are discussed is that only
humans can create imbalances, or that humans are "outside" or the
realm of what's "natural."

We're seeing the results of such "restoration to the balance of
nature" here in Pennsylvania, as the second growth forests mature and
result in near sterility on the forest floor. In a truly "natural"
ecosystem, there is constant destruction and recovery.

As we cannot afford unmanaged wildfires in our heavily populated
state, the game commission grants logging rights on State gamelands.
The result? Within 3 years there is a more diverse and healthy
population of fauna and flora.

Is this ecologically unsound?

I know it's been a few hundred posts back, but I am far from arguing
for unmitigated plowing of the ecosystem. What I have been arguing is
that the incessant over-the-top predictions of calamity are not proven
or assumed by --their own experts --, and that much of the hysteria
is driven by politicians and other hucksters who see opportunity ripe
for a power grab.

Dan

Dan wrote in news:5df380bb-5c94-4c28-9f01-46e08afdce27
@h25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:

On Mar 11, 10:52 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

No one dismisses creationism as a possibility, its just that the
evidence for it is not there.

Reasonable people hardly ever dismiss everything out of hand.

Took the wods tight out of my mouth.


Good luck now.


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dan wrote in news:5df380bb-5c94-4c28-9f01-46e08afdce27
@h25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:

On Mar 11, 10:52 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
No one dismisses creationism as a possibility, its just that the
evidence for it is not there.
Reasonable people hardly ever dismiss everything out of hand.

Took the wods tight out of my mouth.

Get your RRRRRRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrr fixed

Talk-n-Dog wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dan wrote in
news:5df380bb-5c94-4c28-9f01-46e08afdce27
@h25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:

On Mar 11, 10:52 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
No one dismisses creationism as a possibility, its just that the
evidence for it is not there.
Reasonable people hardly ever dismiss everything out of hand.

Took the wods tight out of my mouth.

Get your RRRRRRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrr fixed


That finge is shote than the est.


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Talk-n-Dog wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dan wrote in
news:5df380bb-5c94-4c28-9f01-46e08afdce27
@h25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:

On Mar 11, 10:52 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
No one dismisses creationism as a possibility, its just that the
evidence for it is not there.
Reasonable people hardly ever dismiss everything out of hand.
Took the wods tight out of my mouth.
Get your RRRRRRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrr fixed


That finge is shote than the est.


Bertie
OUCH

Talk-n-Dog wrote in newsczBj.17534
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Talk-n-Dog wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dan wrote in
news:5df380bb-5c94-4c28-9f01-46e08afdce27
@h25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:

On Mar 11, 10:52 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
No one dismisses creationism as a possibility, its just that the
evidence for it is not there.
Reasonable people hardly ever dismiss everything out of hand.
Took the wods tight out of my mouth.
Get your RRRRRRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrr fixed


That finge is shote than the est.


Bertie
OUCH


Yeah. The rest is in sawdust in a jointing machine...

bertie

"Dan" wrote:

Is this ecologically unsound?

I know it's been a few hundred posts back, but I am far from arguing
for unmitigated plowing of the ecosystem. What I have been arguing is
that the incessant over-the-top predictions of calamity are not proven
or assumed by --their own experts --, and that much of the hysteria
is driven by politicians and other hucksters who see opportunity ripe
for a power grab.

Jeez; I got no quarrel with that.

Anyone who makes up his mind on this subject solely by listening to Al Gore
or James Inhofe is just being lazy--or partisan to the point of debility.

My beef is against the campaign of disinformation that is trying to make it
all go away by shooting the messenger: science. Consider one of the charges
one hears repeated over and over, "The scientists can't be believed; they're
all lying to get paid." What becomes of our culture if this idea becomes
conventional wisdom?

On Mar 11, 2:03 pm, "Dan Luke" wrote:

Anyone who makes up his mind on this subject solely by listening to Al Gore
or James Inhofe is just being lazy--or partisan to the point of debility.

My beef is against the campaign of disinformation that is trying to make it
all go away by shooting the messenger: science. Consider one of the charges
one hears repeated over and over, "The scientists can't be believed; they're
all lying to get paid." What becomes of our culture if this idea becomes
conventional wisdom?

In all fairness -- plenty of "scientists" have been paid to lie or
support some position. This is no revelation.

Case in point -- Jarvik. Anyone who saw those ads and knew anything
about him knew they were intentionally misleading.

We are bombarded by "scientists" proclaiming all sorts of nonsense.

The anti-nuke crowd in the '80s was the genesis of this phenomenon --
groups of "scientists" speaking on things they weren't necessarily
qualified to pontificate upon. Yet they did, ad naseum.

[Background: The "issue" in the 80s was US deployment of new
technology arms, not whether nuclear weapons were harmful if used. The
"scientists" demanded that the US unilaterally disarm, assuming that
the Soviets would follow suit. This only reinforced the perception of
"scientist's" naivety, further reducing their potential for swaying
the internal debate]

Whenever we hear about GW, the proponents always quote their pod or
batch or covey of scientists, when further study find the majority are
specialists in something far removed from macro- and paleo-
climatology.

And you wonder why our "culture" is wary of "scientific
pronouncements"?

And as far as "campaign of disinformation," it seems to me the NY
Times, Time, Newsweek, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, et al all comporting with
the Gore view is hardly wilting under a "campaign of disinformation."

Dan

"Dan" wrote:


And as far as "campaign of disinformation," it seems to me the NY
Times, Time, Newsweek, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, et al all comporting with
the Gore view is hardly wilting under a "campaign of disinformation."

Here's the difference between the various bloggers, media talkers and think
tanks attempting to debunk AGW, and the National Academy of Sciences, for
instance. The former tell lies; repeating them even when they must *know*
they are lies. They are good at it, slippery and hard to pin down; masters
of the half truth and the cherry-picked fact, but liars nonetheless. So far,
no one has shown me that the NAS or NOAA or the USGS is lying about AGW.

This is not something new. Some of these same liars were in the service of
the tobacco companies, using the same tactics. Some of them also use the
same tricks trying to debunk evolution, calling it a "religion" to get
creationism equal time in public school science classes. See Worldnet Daily
or the Eagle Forum for plenty of examples of the overlap. They are
successful as long as the NY Times, Time, Newsweek, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Fox,
et al. continue to give them time.