![]() |
€uromeinke, FEJ. and Ghoulish Delight RULE!!! NA abides. |
![]() |
#14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 2,852
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Well said, Moonliner. There are so many good reasons to pursue alternative energy, promote clean air, restore natural habitats and so on, even if humans are not causing climate change.
I've read about the hacked emails. I see that one researcher stepped down from his post for suggesting a "trick" that skewed data - something I agree is best brought to light. Bad science is bad science. But much of the fuss is simply about attitude. The emails contained insider chat in which global warming skeptics were called idiots, and so on. Totally irrelevant to the actual science. (Such name-calling takes place out in the open, in comment sections on websites on all sides of every issue, for instance.) I have a long way to go before I can even pretend to have a grasp on earth science and the data supporting or not supporting climate change. Ultimately, the facts will speak for themselves. Real science has great self-correcting mechanisms. Public discourse and private chatter, not so much. Last edited by flippyshark : 12-11-2009 at 03:28 PM. Reason: spelling and clarity |
![]() |
Submit to Quotes
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|