3 ms·

People pay them to offset the carbon footprint of their site. Except if they are paying them an amount based on an inaccurately calculated footprint, that's a p

People pay them to offset the carbon footprint of their site. Except if they are paying them an amount based on an inaccurately calculated footprint, that's a problem. If you wish to continue drinking the Kool-Aid, go ahead! It sure is tasty! But don't blame me when your teeth fall out.

lliiffee 18y ago
Problems like this need to be solved. That is, the real world demands that we estimate things that cannot be estimated reliably. To take a less controversial example than global warming, consider the risk of avian flu. Clearly, we cannot get a reasonable quantitative estimate of the chance of a flu epidemic, or how many people it would kill, etc. Nevertheless, we are forced to decide what preparations (if any) to make anyway. Just because the problem is hard, doesn't mean it isn't worth attempting. I see no problem with what they are doing, as long as they are honest about the uncertainty in the estimates they hand to you.
- fluidrazor 18y ago
  Putting the global warming debate aside, I totally agree with you. However, I don't see them being transparent. Furthermore, I think given the complexity of determining what they claim, the simplicity of their model is almost certainly not adequate. I like your Avian Flu example. I think in that case, we would both agree that there is a point at which preparations for such an event would be almost useless when there is a certain lack of information, when what we do know and what we don't know is so muddled that we are not even sure what direction to take. Obviously doctors and scientists are not blind here and know generally what direction to take in their preparations, just not to what scale. What I am arguing in terms of CO2Stats here is that the likely inaccuracy of their calculations just about voids what they are offering because you don't know that what you are getting is in the proper proportion or even that it actually helps to the degree that they say it does.
- run4yourlives 18y ago
  There's a difference though between taking a best guess because we need to know, and selling a service based on your best guess without putting that methodology up for scrutiny. Without seeing how they calculate your imprint, they're basically working on the same "trust us" principle as the guys that sell that Q-ray bracelet.

lliiffee 18y ago

Problems like this need to be solved. That is, the real world demands that we estimate things that cannot be estimated reliably. To take a less controversial example than global warming, consider the risk of avian flu. Clearly, we cannot get a reasonable quantitative estimate of the chance of a flu epidemic, or how many people it would kill, etc. Nevertheless, we are forced to decide what preparations (if any) to make anyway. Just because the problem is hard, doesn't mean it isn't worth attempting. I see no problem with what they are doing, as long as they are honest about the uncertainty in the estimates they hand to you.

fluidrazor 18y ago
Putting the global warming debate aside, I totally agree with you. However, I don't see them being transparent. Furthermore, I think given the complexity of determining what they claim, the simplicity of their model is almost certainly not adequate. I like your Avian Flu example. I think in that case, we would both agree that there is a point at which preparations for such an event would be almost useless when there is a certain lack of information, when what we do know and what we don't know is so muddled that we are not even sure what direction to take. Obviously doctors and scientists are not blind here and know generally what direction to take in their preparations, just not to what scale. What I am arguing in terms of CO2Stats here is that the likely inaccuracy of their calculations just about voids what they are offering because you don't know that what you are getting is in the proper proportion or even that it actually helps to the degree that they say it does.
run4yourlives 18y ago
There's a difference though between taking a best guess because we need to know, and selling a service based on your best guess without putting that methodology up for scrutiny. Without seeing how they calculate your imprint, they're basically working on the same "trust us" principle as the guys that sell that Q-ray bracelet.