tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34480619.post4754513066787686924..comments2024-03-11T13:47:03.621-05:00Comments on Physics and Physicists: Is Oprah Winfrey A Crackpot?ZapperZhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15861398273820851809noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34480619.post-54682444501704733872009-06-07T08:05:09.144-05:002009-06-07T08:05:09.144-05:00I really do NOT want this to get derailed again in...I really do NOT want this to get derailed again into a global warming debate. I've said more than enough on this already.<br /><br />So it will end here.<br /><br />Zz.ZapperZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15861398273820851809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34480619.post-13000118663072578802009-06-07T08:01:40.312-05:002009-06-07T08:01:40.312-05:00BTW, your comment on how much it costs to prevent ...BTW, your comment on how much it costs to prevent AGW, think again if anti-AGW is wrong. There are ample research done to show that it will cost even MORE if anti-AGW is wrong than if AGW is wrong.<br /><br />See:<br /><br />http://physicsandphysicists.blogspot.com/2007/03/statistical-analysis-debunks-climate.html<br /><br />Zz.ZapperZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15861398273820851809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34480619.post-78616387837055041762009-06-07T07:58:25.469-05:002009-06-07T07:58:25.469-05:00Er... that "dumping" part is not sanctio...Er... that "dumping" part is not sanctioned by any official organization that endorses AGW. I know for a fact that this isn't one of the steps that the APS has listed to combat AGW. So I certainly have no desire to defend such an act, which in itself is based on highly dubious science.<br /><br />Zz.ZapperZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15861398273820851809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34480619.post-17050357543039242232009-06-07T07:21:42.765-05:002009-06-07T07:21:42.765-05:00"Consider the possiblity that each side could..."Consider the possiblity that each side could be wrong. If I side with AGW and they're wrong, what harm to the environment did we cause? If I side with anti-AGW and they're wrong, what harm to the environment did we cause?"<br /><br />Interesting argument. That's Pascal's Wager, with AGW instead of God. Although I doubt we're going to waste billions trying to prevent the existence of god.<br /><br />Also, I believe you're wrong about not harming the environment - we're illegally dumping millions of tonnes of iron sulphate into the ocean to try and lower atmospheric co2:<br />http://www.theecologist.org/pages/archive_detail.asp?content_id=2125<br /><br />And whilst the world is focused on one single cause of damage to our environment, we're ignoring the myriad other ways in which we are actually destroying the planet.JChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17967966771724429125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34480619.post-8876082678978630532009-06-07T05:49:27.597-05:002009-06-07T05:49:27.597-05:00I rely on experts in this area of study, and there...I rely on experts in this area of study, and there is an overwhelming consensus of AGW. Look in the studies done by the American Physical Society (which NEVER sides with anything simply because it was politically correct to do so - see their stand on those missile defense shield).<br /><br />Unless you to are an expert in this area and have done substantial research on your own, then how can you pick against such overwhelming consensus over those opposed to it? What factor allows you to know which one is more valid?<br /><br />There's also another factor here. Consider the possiblity that each side could be wrong. If I side with AGW and they're wrong, what harm to the environment did we cause? If I side with anti-AGW and they're wrong, what harm to the environment did we cause? Which one would cause MORE harm to the way I live if they happen to be wrong?<br /><br />Zz.ZapperZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15861398273820851809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34480619.post-19597933074486274732009-06-07T02:30:22.195-05:002009-06-07T02:30:22.195-05:00Couldn't agree more.
Funny though - you menti...Couldn't agree more.<br /><br />Funny though - you mention the difference between correlation and causation, and the importance of recognising anecdotal evidence; yet you have links to anthropological global warming propaganda on your site.<br /><br />What gives?JChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17967966771724429125noreply@blogger.com