4 ms·
Show me more on the science on them, and I might be concerned about this being a problem.
by Aloha 10y ago
Show me more on the science on them, and I might be concerned about this being a problem.
- StanislavPetrov 10y agoOnly an absolute fool says, "its fine to saturate the environment with synthesized chemicals with unknown effects until they are proven to be harmful." Unfortunately this is the law of the land and the opinion of many.
- 20yrs_no_equity 10y agoAppeal to fear.
- StanislavPetrov 10y agoWhat does that have to do with fear? How on earth can you say its fine for me to go into my basement and mix up any chemical compound I want and saturate you with it? How on earth can you say I should have the right to adulterate the environment and subject you to any chemical I mix up in my basement until you prove that its harming you? The truly frightening part isn't that people like you, completely devoid of logic and common sense, exist. Its that people like you are many, and that your ignorance is exploited by those who run the show and profit off of this poisoning.
- colemickens 10y agoI bet you believe in that global warming conspiracy shared by virtually every scientist on the planet too. Pfft. /s
- CamperBob2 10y agoNothing measured in parts per trillion is "saturating the environment," and everything including plain water has "unknown effects" in one context or another. The precautionary principle is epistemologically bankrupt. But then this sort of thread always generates more hype than light, I suppose.
- bandushrew 10y ago"Nothing measured in parts per trillion is "saturating the environment,"" citation needed. There are a bunch of compounds whose effects are so harmful that a few parts per million are potentially lethal. The fact you apparently are unaware of any of them, speaks volumes.
- CamperBob2 10y agocitation needed. Which do you prefer, Webster's or OED?
- Qwertious 10y agoIf you're not sure, just provide both of them, instead of providing neither.
- CamperBob2 10y agoFair enough. Looks like the OED has a paywall, but Webster covers the definition adequately: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/saturate http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/saturate
- hueving 10y agoPpm vs ppt is 6 orders of magnitude difference. To put that in context, 6 orders of magnitude the other way would be part per part.
- StanislavPetrov 10y agoThank you for being an example of the ignorant mentality that allows poisons to flood our environment. Who the hell are you to say that the adulterant you introduce into my bloodstream is safe because its such a low level? Should you have to wait until I stick my thumb in your eye to attain proof that its harmful before I'm prevented from doing so?
- rndgermandude 10y ago
- hueving 10y agoDon't say "people like you". You are blatantly constructing a strawman and it makes your whole argument look very weak.
- anonymouslee 10y agoYou might be interested in reading about the precautionary principle [1]. [1] - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1240435/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1240435/
- internaut 10y agoNot science. Politics or political philosophy but not science. PP is as scientific as Pascal's Wager and for the same reasons.