3 ms·

Sure. So ignore the activists, outside of publishing stuff to make your point. My point is it'll all go adversarial and that'll be more heat than light. I am s

Sure. So ignore the activists, outside of publishing stuff to make your point. My point is it'll all go adversarial and that'll be more heat than light. I am still waiting on the book 'AGW for Dummies' that people who want to make the point can use as a reference. There are a handful of places on the Web that are pretty good, but it's not enough. I don't like the appeal to consensus. Give people the tools and let them make up their own minds. Smoking is a terrible thing to use as an example. "Whoemever" is aiming at the lobbyists and hitting people who have no dog in the fight and just can't, or won't, quit smoking. The companies were not alone in this; they had millions of customers. Still do. There was a component of the thing that was about truth. but that passed a long time ago. Now it's just about winning or losing. Here's hoping I'm wrong and AGW doesn't go the same way. Aren't things divided enough yet? "When elephants fight, it is the grass gets trampled".

ceejayoz 12y ago
> So ignore the activists, outside of publishing stuff to make your point. That's been tried, and it results in them getting their misinformation heard by the public (who simply don't have the scientific knowledge to figure out it's bullshit) without a counter-argument. See: anti-vaccination movement. > I don't like the appeal to consensus. Give people the tools and let them make up their own minds. One of the tools necessary is a graduate-level education in the topics at hand. I don't get to do my own cancer treatment or prescribe myself lab tests for the same reasons random yahoos shouldn't get to evaluate climate science - we don't have the requisite training and knowledge. That's why we have experts, who nearly unanimously agree. > The companies were not alone in this; they had millions of customers. Still do. And the taxes are intended, in part, to prevent new customers. Teenagers pause a bit at the idea of picking up a $10/day habit.

ceejayoz 12y ago

> So ignore the activists, outside of publishing stuff to make your point. That's been tried, and it results in them getting their misinformation heard by the public (who simply don't have the scientific knowledge to figure out it's bullshit) without a counter-argument. See: anti-vaccination movement. > I don't like the appeal to consensus. Give people the tools and let them make up their own minds. One of the tools necessary is a graduate-level education in the topics at hand. I don't get to do my own cancer treatment or prescribe myself lab tests for the same reasons random yahoos shouldn't get to evaluate climate science - we don't have the requisite training and knowledge. That's why we have experts, who nearly unanimously agree. > The companies were not alone in this; they had millions of customers. Still do. And the taxes are intended, in part, to prevent new customers. Teenagers pause a bit at the idea of picking up a $10/day habit.