.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to ShadowSD.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="ShadowSD:469860"]Man_of_the_Century said:[QUOTE]ShadowSD said:[QUOTE]If you found a lump on yourself, and the doctors couldn't prove 100% that it wasn't cancerous, would you be more inclined to play it safe and ask them to continue looking into it, or would you tell people to stop worrying because regardless of whether the doctors believe it's more likely to be malignant, it's not 100% proven? In matters of survival, erring on the side of caution is only common sense. [/QUOTE] It wouldn't be such an easy answer... Lets say that its a dark spot on my skin that's in question. Let them cut it off. One one side, if it is cancer it would cause big problems down the road. The other is a slight chance of infection and a scab. Now, if that lump was on my heart, it wouldn't be so easy.[/QUOTE] But, to follow the analogy, removing this lump does not require heart surgery; there is no fatal threat to the earth if we try to make things better. The only liability to changing our policies is financial, which I think is comparable to not wanting to pay the doctor to keep looking if he's not 100% sure that the cancer is malignant. Despite the fact that you and I are more reasonable, there are plenty of people out there who would put their own greed over all of our survival; many people can go a lifetime purely on denial, rationalization, and self-delusion. Man_of_the_Century said:[QUOTE]I'm not opposed to doing minor things to start off with... Like better emissions in cars, cleaner fuel, better processes to making products. The things I don't want to see till a cause can be agreed apon are things like eliminating oil without something to replace it.[/QUOTE] I agree with you on all of that. (Although I wasn't aware that eliminating oil before we have alternatives was seriously being argued by anyone substantial in this debate, and it's certainly not the position of the scientific school of thought that believes humans are a cause of global warming.) Man_of_the_Century said:[QUOTE]I also don't like someone like Gore telling me that things have to change now or the planet will self-destruct before the year 2007. Like the cancer thing, I will listen to the direct opinion of the doctor, not the guy next to me in the waiting room, who has no experiance in the field.[/QUOTE] I haven't seen this movie yet, and I've never liked Gore, but the doctors in our analogy are actually much more comparable to scientists, most of whom believe it is more likely that we are a partial cause of a global warming (even if they can't prove it). [/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.017 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][