[ExI] Union of Concerned Scientists

[Brent Allsop]

And everyone should keep in mind the claims of 'scientific consensus' on 
this issue could be complete mistaken BS.

If there is a consensus, what evidence is there for such beyond such so 
called obviously biased "unions"?  Here is a lot of evidence against such:

http://www.oism.org/pproject/    ("signed by over 31,000 American 
Scientists')
http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/22866/New_York_Global_Warming_Conference_Considers_Manhattan_Declaration.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_global_warming_consensus

To bad there isn't some rigorous open  equally biased for comparison way 
to know for sure how much scientific (and otherwise) consensus there is 
so we could end all this infernal yes there is, know there isn't, for 
eternity, at least one side being obviously false ignorant childishness?

Brent Allsop


spike wrote:
>> ...On Behalf Of Max More
>> Subject: [ExI] Union of Concerned Scientists
>>
>> I have a question for everyone: Actually, first, a 
>> pre-question: Are you familiar with the Union of Concerned 
>> Scientists? (If you've read much by Julian Simon or Petr 
>> Beckmann you've probably heard a
>> little.) If so, how objective do you think they are, and do 
>> you see a pattern shaped by any particular attitude toward 
>> advancing technology or by a political agenda... Max
>>     
>
>
> Max, my own reading is that they jump straight to a particular solution
> before all the data is in.  I can't find anything on their site about the
> possible cooling effects of increased high cirrus clouds for instance,
> nothing about the alarming shortage of sun spots, and what do we do if we
> measure average cooling.  Since UCS already decided that increased CO2 leads
> to global warming, then if some other effect comes along and starts global
> cooling, do we then burn coal like hell trying to compensate?  Do we
> subsidize oil?  To me this is one of the biggest questions we face if we
> decide the humans are impacting the global temperature.  UCS sidesteps that
> question altogether.  I see far too much idea fixation on reducing CO2
> emissions.  The global warming people need a unified theory that takes into
> account the suggested action if we see the much more immediately harmful
> possibility of a cooling planet.
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>