Re: [asa] Channel 4 on global warming

At 05:02 AM 3/13/2007, Michael Roberts wrote:

>...John convinced me of global warming some 10 years ago and I get
>impatient with those who don't want to see the problem. ~ Michael

@ If I hoped to have any credibility with those capable of rational
thought, I wouldn't run around bragging about being convinced by the
"arguments" of 60's - type - radical / alarmist-zealots preaching
stuff like this

QUOTE: "Unless we announce disasters no one will listen .. Global
warming is now a weapon of mass destruction. It kills more people
than terrorism.." ~ Sir John Houghton, first chairman of IPCC Monday
July 28, 2003 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,93466,00.html

You may want to reconsider and take Burgy's advice about those who
deliberately peddle junk science in order to scare people into
accepting their agenda:

QUOTE: "..there are "scientists" in abundance who ...are not shy
about arguing "junk science," citing only favorable evidence while
ignoring the contrary, thereby risking not only their own
reputations, but also that of the profession we all love. The authors
cite an abundance of instances, some involving scientists of
nationwide stature. Frankly, I felt sick as I read this book. .. The
authors show how easy it is to buffalo the media, and by extension,
the public, by pseudoscientific claims made by "real" scientists
whose intellectual heritage is that of nineteenth- century snake oil
salesmen. To conclude this review, I will illustrate its disturbing
message by telling an old, stale joke. Why do they bury scientists
twelve feet down? Because, deep down, they are really good
people. Oops! Not funny! That should be some other profession, not
"scientists!" .... Other professions have their share of shysters.
So does the scientific profession. The public just has not picked up
on us yet. It is clear that far too many in our profession have lost
their way. Are they a small minority? I would like to think so. Do
they have a bad influence in our society? Yes. Is this a good thing?
Clearly, no. .." ~ John W. Burgeson reviewing TRUST US, WE'RE
EXPERTS... http://www.asa3.org/asa/BookReviews2000-present/9-02.html#Rampton

Or Wayne's caution:

QUOTE: "..Science is dazzling, and you can bamboozle all sorts of
smart people with a few whizz bang proofs and a lot of nonsense
equations. If you have some fancy gadget to show, that's even
better. Pretty soon, people are like a bunch of dumb dogs staring at
flashing lights and loud noises. Who wouldn't envy such glitter and
want to emply its tinsel shine to their apologetics. Proof, by
science. It's just so inviting that the temptation is
irresistible! Religion is just difficult to add that pizzazz, but we
surely hunger for it, because science is so powerful and impressive.
.." ~ Wayne Dawsonzhu@aol.com Sun, 19 Feb 2006 11:34:04 EST Re:
Self-deception, faith, and
scepticism http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/200602/0328.html

QUOTE: "The problem is that greed, lust of the world with its the
trappings of power and influence, and the ability to find all manner
of specious pretext to exploit and abuse out brothers and sisters in
Christ, all conspire to tempt even those who have some fear of the
Lord to sin." ~ Wayne Dawsonzhu@aol.com Wed, 8 Mar 2006 11:43:15
EST Re: The Left Hand of God or "is God a [s-word]"
http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/200603/0292.html

Or Don's advice:

QUOTE: "Scientists who buy unhesitatingly into climate models are
playing a high-risk game. They could lose big. How will Christians
look if they eagerly buy in and then the climate models prove to be
wrong for whatever reason? The wiser course is to hedge bets.
~ Don Winterstein - Tue, 6 Feb 2007 - 6:58 PM Re: [asa] Level of
certainty in science

~ Janice .... "..Our chosen environment is liberty, and liberty is
the central organizing principle of America. To be consistent with
our most cherished principle, our environmental policies must be
consistent with liberty. Restricting liberty not only denies
Americans their chosen environment, but also constrains environmental
progress.

Liberty has powerful environmental benefits. Freedom unleashes forces
most needed to make our environment cleaner, healthier and safer for
the future. It fosters scientific inquiry, technological innovation,
entrepreneurship, rapid information exchange, accuracy and flexibility.

Free people work to improve the environment, and liberty is the
energy behind environmental progress."

Excerpted from:
<http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1799442/posts?page=5#5>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1799442/posts?page=5#5

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1799442/posts?page=3#3

Posted on
03/12/2007
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1799372/posts?page=34#34
[refresh browser]

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Mar 13 13:30:03 2007