Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: [internetworkers] So what happened to ice skating?

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Michael Czeiszperger <michael AT czeiszperger.org>
  • To: "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [internetworkers] So what happened to ice skating?
  • Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 14:04:27 -0400


On Jul 7, 2006, at 10:37 AM, Tony Spencer wrote:

You really think they have something against science after reading the page?
That page is nothing but science! It has nothing to do with the bible or
anything anti-science. These guys spell it out quite nicely:

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm

The way science works is you get lots of contradictory information at the beginning, and then eventually you get to the truth as more data is collected, and hypotheses are tested and rejected. The term "junk science" is really meant to encourage distrust of science in general for political reasons, for if there are no facts, only opinion, it makes it easier sway public opinion to support things which aren't in their best interests. For that reason I don't trust anything that's on the junkscience.com site, and the second-hand smoke link I posted is just one example.

I haven't personally read about global warming in depth, and I'm sure its quite difficult to measure long term climate trends, but have read long articles making the case that mainstream science agrees with the points made in the movie. Regardless of any specific points in Mr. Gore's movie, I do know that the sequence of events surrounding "inconvenient" science goes like this:

1. A consensus emerges among mainstream scientists about a subject that's either deemed immoral or not friendly enough to business. The mix among scientists is about 70% for/ 30% against.

2. "Junk Science" springs into action to bring attention to the 30%.

3. 5 years later its 90% for/10% against.

4. 5 years later its 99% for and 1% against and even the industry lobbyists give up and concede the point and then start arguing it doesn't matter anyway.


________________________________________________________________________ _________
"Kindness knows no shame" -- S. Wonder
-- michael at czeiszperger dot org, Chapel Hill, NC










Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page