Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bingo
Well ... you're always good for a hyperbole, and over exageration.
If you were answering me you missed the mark. I didn't call it a conspiracy, and I'm not calling it a myth.
I am questioning why there is so much conflicting information and so little pause for thought with said information.
That's a rush to judgement plain and simple.
Is it possible that a rush to judgement can be proven the right judgement call when the dust settles? For sure ... but that doesn't remove the fact that the initial move was indeed a rush and with that there are dangers.
Why not slow down and get to the bottom of these things once and for all?
Seems the assumption of global warming is the one that doesn't want to hear any sort of opposition. Only natural for enviromental scientists to be pro-environment, the silent middle might have some pretty serious reservations, but don't want to be branded pro industry or pro pollution for questioning what has become a run table.
|
No Bingo, I wasn't answering you. I would have quoted you if I were answering you. I'm not surprised to see you take this stance though, you've always been one to sit on the fence, so why be different here?
I equate this problem to that of a guy who has been a smoker for 30 years. He goes to the doctor, complaining of a bad cough. The doctor takes a listen and doesn't like what he hears. He sends the guy off for some tests. The tests come back and the guy is diagnozed with lung cancer. The doctor tells him that he can get better, but will have to stop smoking and receive treatment. The guy doesn't like the advice, as he's a real big smoker, and goes to a string of doctors. Of the 100 doctors he sees 80% say he's got lung cancer, 10% say they are not 100% certain, and 10% say he's fine and ask him if he would like another cigarette (these fine doctors have large holdings in Phillip Morris). The guy continues to smoke, and continues to get progressively worse, with his symptoms getting worse as time passes. So what's the best course of action? Treat the symptoms or continue to wait it out for that defining diagnosis when we are certain what caused the cough (it's medical thing called an autopsy)?
I can't believe that anyone has the nads to argue the idea of global warming and environmental change. Anyone who has lived in Calgary for any length of time will tell you that the weather has change. As a kid there was always tons of snow during the winter. Now there is very little. The color of the air has even changed. 30 years ago it was always clear. Now there's usually an ugly yellow cloud hanging over the city. And that's in Calgary, a relatively small city. I was driving into Phoenix the other day and couldn't see Camelback mountain from 10 miles away. When you can see the air, something is wrong.