- This topic has 115 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 9 months ago by
Anonymous.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 17, 2008 at 4:49 PM #241478July 17, 2008 at 5:04 PM #241305
Arraya
ParticipantI’m not talking about this specific issue. Which I have my own issues on how it is presented to the public. It’s all of your post’s. You stance on oil, GW and Obama is right out of right wing talk radio playbook.
Show some individuality.
This planet is an ecological disaster on many levels and would take many many books for you to understand the breadth of problems. GW is not the scariest monster at our villages door. At least not in the respect that we can do anything about it.
The decline of world oil production will take care of even the most aggressive climate scientists wishes on carbon reduction. We should start terminal decline somewhere between late 09 to mid 2011. However, it renders our fractional reserve, grow or die, fiat based economic model useless.
July 17, 2008 at 5:04 PM #241444ParticipantI’m not talking about this specific issue. Which I have my own issues on how it is presented to the public. It’s all of your post’s. You stance on oil, GW and Obama is right out of right wing talk radio playbook.
Show some individuality.
This planet is an ecological disaster on many levels and would take many many books for you to understand the breadth of problems. GW is not the scariest monster at our villages door. At least not in the respect that we can do anything about it.
The decline of world oil production will take care of even the most aggressive climate scientists wishes on carbon reduction. We should start terminal decline somewhere between late 09 to mid 2011. However, it renders our fractional reserve, grow or die, fiat based economic model useless.
July 17, 2008 at 5:04 PM #241451ParticipantI’m not talking about this specific issue. Which I have my own issues on how it is presented to the public. It’s all of your post’s. You stance on oil, GW and Obama is right out of right wing talk radio playbook.
Show some individuality.
This planet is an ecological disaster on many levels and would take many many books for you to understand the breadth of problems. GW is not the scariest monster at our villages door. At least not in the respect that we can do anything about it.
The decline of world oil production will take care of even the most aggressive climate scientists wishes on carbon reduction. We should start terminal decline somewhere between late 09 to mid 2011. However, it renders our fractional reserve, grow or die, fiat based economic model useless.
July 17, 2008 at 5:04 PM #241505ParticipantI’m not talking about this specific issue. Which I have my own issues on how it is presented to the public. It’s all of your post’s. You stance on oil, GW and Obama is right out of right wing talk radio playbook.
Show some individuality.
This planet is an ecological disaster on many levels and would take many many books for you to understand the breadth of problems. GW is not the scariest monster at our villages door. At least not in the respect that we can do anything about it.
The decline of world oil production will take care of even the most aggressive climate scientists wishes on carbon reduction. We should start terminal decline somewhere between late 09 to mid 2011. However, it renders our fractional reserve, grow or die, fiat based economic model useless.
July 17, 2008 at 5:04 PM #241509ParticipantI’m not talking about this specific issue. Which I have my own issues on how it is presented to the public. It’s all of your post’s. You stance on oil, GW and Obama is right out of right wing talk radio playbook.
Show some individuality.
This planet is an ecological disaster on many levels and would take many many books for you to understand the breadth of problems. GW is not the scariest monster at our villages door. At least not in the respect that we can do anything about it.
The decline of world oil production will take care of even the most aggressive climate scientists wishes on carbon reduction. We should start terminal decline somewhere between late 09 to mid 2011. However, it renders our fractional reserve, grow or die, fiat based economic model useless.
July 17, 2008 at 5:13 PM #241325NotCranky
Participant“However, it renders our fractional reserve, grow or die, fiat based economic model useless.”
How long does this take Arraya? What is the course it takes?
July 17, 2008 at 5:13 PM #241464Participant“However, it renders our fractional reserve, grow or die, fiat based economic model useless.”
How long does this take Arraya? What is the course it takes?
July 17, 2008 at 5:13 PM #241471Participant“However, it renders our fractional reserve, grow or die, fiat based economic model useless.”
How long does this take Arraya? What is the course it takes?
July 17, 2008 at 5:13 PM #241525Participant“However, it renders our fractional reserve, grow or die, fiat based economic model useless.”
How long does this take Arraya? What is the course it takes?
July 17, 2008 at 5:13 PM #241528Participant“However, it renders our fractional reserve, grow or die, fiat based economic model useless.”
How long does this take Arraya? What is the course it takes?
July 17, 2008 at 5:31 PM #241347Ash Housewares
ParticipantHere’s a hypothetical question- How much agreement do you need before you have a consensus? How certain do you need to be?
I don’t think there will EVER be 100% agreement about many topics in science. Natural selection is still denied by a few with biology backgrounds, despite it being the basis for modern medicine and substantiated by the fossil record. We don’t even know how gravity works, does that mean we should cancel all new airplane orders (some evidence suggests particles at opposite ends of the universe exert forces on each other instantaneously- in contrast to the speed of light “speed limit”)? So there will always be some degree of uncertainty, but that should not stop us from planning accordingly to what we think is most likely to be true. If you wait for certainty you will wait a long time, maybe forever, meanwhile the window of time you had to do something will have long past.
There was no 100% agreement that Iraq had WMDs, but I’d bet a years wages you supported the invasion on what intelligence we had. Why the double standard? Why is spotty intelligence good enough when it fits your views, but nothing short of 100% certainty is required for ideas you find unappealing?
July 17, 2008 at 5:31 PM #241484ParticipantHere’s a hypothetical question- How much agreement do you need before you have a consensus? How certain do you need to be?
I don’t think there will EVER be 100% agreement about many topics in science. Natural selection is still denied by a few with biology backgrounds, despite it being the basis for modern medicine and substantiated by the fossil record. We don’t even know how gravity works, does that mean we should cancel all new airplane orders (some evidence suggests particles at opposite ends of the universe exert forces on each other instantaneously- in contrast to the speed of light “speed limit”)? So there will always be some degree of uncertainty, but that should not stop us from planning accordingly to what we think is most likely to be true. If you wait for certainty you will wait a long time, maybe forever, meanwhile the window of time you had to do something will have long past.
There was no 100% agreement that Iraq had WMDs, but I’d bet a years wages you supported the invasion on what intelligence we had. Why the double standard? Why is spotty intelligence good enough when it fits your views, but nothing short of 100% certainty is required for ideas you find unappealing?
July 17, 2008 at 5:31 PM #241491ParticipantHere’s a hypothetical question- How much agreement do you need before you have a consensus? How certain do you need to be?
I don’t think there will EVER be 100% agreement about many topics in science. Natural selection is still denied by a few with biology backgrounds, despite it being the basis for modern medicine and substantiated by the fossil record. We don’t even know how gravity works, does that mean we should cancel all new airplane orders (some evidence suggests particles at opposite ends of the universe exert forces on each other instantaneously- in contrast to the speed of light “speed limit”)? So there will always be some degree of uncertainty, but that should not stop us from planning accordingly to what we think is most likely to be true. If you wait for certainty you will wait a long time, maybe forever, meanwhile the window of time you had to do something will have long past.
There was no 100% agreement that Iraq had WMDs, but I’d bet a years wages you supported the invasion on what intelligence we had. Why the double standard? Why is spotty intelligence good enough when it fits your views, but nothing short of 100% certainty is required for ideas you find unappealing?
July 17, 2008 at 5:31 PM #241545ParticipantHere’s a hypothetical question- How much agreement do you need before you have a consensus? How certain do you need to be?
I don’t think there will EVER be 100% agreement about many topics in science. Natural selection is still denied by a few with biology backgrounds, despite it being the basis for modern medicine and substantiated by the fossil record. We don’t even know how gravity works, does that mean we should cancel all new airplane orders (some evidence suggests particles at opposite ends of the universe exert forces on each other instantaneously- in contrast to the speed of light “speed limit”)? So there will always be some degree of uncertainty, but that should not stop us from planning accordingly to what we think is most likely to be true. If you wait for certainty you will wait a long time, maybe forever, meanwhile the window of time you had to do something will have long past.
There was no 100% agreement that Iraq had WMDs, but I’d bet a years wages you supported the invasion on what intelligence we had. Why the double standard? Why is spotty intelligence good enough when it fits your views, but nothing short of 100% certainty is required for ideas you find unappealing?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.