View Single Post
  #8   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats,alt.philosophy
Giga Giga is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 7
Default Embracing Climate Change, or Why I Have Enjoyed the Cooler Summer


"Errol" wrote in message
...
On Aug 25, 10:03 am, "Giga" "Giga" just(removetheseandaddmatthe end)
wrote:
wrote in message

...



On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:04:21 -0700 (PDT), BOfL
wrote:


How can there be an idea of perfection or a perfect state of being, if
such a thing has never existed or been experienced previously? Such a
concept can only come from an extrinsic source, something outside of
the human experience, ergo the possibility of "God.") Perhaps
someone sometime will provide some reasonable answers to this
conundrum. No one has yet, to my satisfaction.


--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access


And what answers would be adequate?
Many want proof, but dont know what the proof should be.


BOfL


What I was hoping to do was to point out what seems to me to be a bit
of an irony - a contradiction of dogmas of those that are wholesale
subscribers to global warming alarmism and also adopt a stoic,
clinical definition of evolution and death. It's difficult for me to
imagine how the conflict of those perspectives can be reconciled. I'm
more than willing to be enlightened if for some reason I'm confused in
comprehending those perspectives.


Some things can be changed by human beings and some things can't. If
global
warming is caused by human beings then presumably we can stop it as well.
If
global warming is likely to lead to consequences we don't want then we may
want to stop it. Also we seem to have the means to stop it or alleviate
it,
by reducing co2 output, and maybe other techniques. So if we can and want
to
stop it why not? Its the same principle we apply to everything, for
instance
if you are uncomfortable, and you can change that, then why not? If you
can
forsee that leaving a pan on the stove is going to burn what you are
cooking
then turn down the heat or take it off the cooker?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


To continue with your stove metaphor; what if it takes 5 000 years to
reduce the heat by 1 notch? 5 000 years of doing everything right.

It's too much effort for most people and they are content to be
bamboozled by the people who conduct tests (sponsored by fuel creation
or fuel intensive industries) that show that mankind is innocent as a
lamb and have had no effect on global warming

This is an unpopular viewpoint however. I expect to be flamed for it.

= If all this GW theory is true then its taken about 60 years to cause the
problem, so hopefully a similar or shorter time period we can put it right.
And if it took 5000 years to put it down one notch that would imply to me
that if that effort hadn't been made it might well have gone up a lot, like
1000 notches.