The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Do we really have control over our climate? > Comments

Do we really have control over our climate? : Comments

By Ray Evans, published 8/2/2007

Climate change: the current guilt-ridden hysteria, which seems to have captured the chattering classes of the West, shows that the veneer of rationality is very thin indeed.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
Ah, the beleaguered environment.
Lavoisier Group to the rescue!
Wow!
Posted by colinsett, Thursday, 8 February 2007 9:05:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bob Dylan: "You dont need a weathervane to see which way the wind is blowing"
Posted by Ho Hum, Thursday, 8 February 2007 9:08:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ray Evans and his fellow "true believers" over at the IPA etc etc are the very epitome of one dimensional "rational" man. Totally embedded in the reductionist ideology of scientific materialism, and (sometimes when they talk "religion") its Protestant equivalent---Weber's Iron Cage.
This site discusses the baneful limitations of the ideology of scientism--as distinct from the practice of the method of science, which is free enquiry into everything done without any prior presumptions of what is True, Real, or possible.

1. www.aboutadidam.org/lesser_alternatives/scientific_materialism/index.html
Posted by Ho Hum, Thursday, 8 February 2007 9:21:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AS stated on previous posts, anyone gullible enough to hold evolution as science is bound to come up with all sorts of contradictions. The High Priests of GW are intolerant of those who want to look at facts. Its a pity that our pollies are now having to play the game. I doubt whether many of them seriously believe a lot of the nonsense being preached. I hope I am around in 30 years time to see what the newest bandwagon is. Obviously no one takes any notice of the doomsdayers of the 1970's and 80's who are now preaching another doomsday message instead with a different set of fudged and manipulated data.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 8 February 2007 9:29:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This piece of gobbledegook is mining industry propaganda, pushed by people who don't care what sort of planet we leave to our grandchildren.

Quoting from sourcewatch http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Lavoisier_Group

The Lavoisier Group is a global warming skeptic organisation, based in Australia. It argues that the evidence for global warming is based on inexact science and that any policy responses, such as signing the Kyoto Protocol, would be too expensive for Australia's industry.

The group is closely associated with the Australian mining industry, and was founded in 2000 by Ray Evans, then an executive at Western Mining Corporation (WMC), who was also involved in founding the HR Nicholls Society and the Bennelong Society. Hugh Morgan, former WMC boss and head of the Business Council of Australia until 2005, delivered the group's inaugural speech.

Lavoisier is a fairly small operation, with under 100 members and an annual budget of around $10,000. [1]
Posted by billie, Thursday, 8 February 2007 9:45:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"I suppose when you reject God you need to hold on to some belief and dress it up as science." Same for evolution, then? Gosh, Runner. You might as well repudiate mathematics. Einstein would NOT be impressed.

He did have an opinion, though - science without religion is lame; reigion without science is blind. Not much point having all the (empirical) answers if you don't know what to do with them. Then again, at least you'll see what's coming. The O.T. doesn't go into a lot of detail about atmospherics, you see.

It's not all doom and gloom. There's something to be said for science. Come to the Dark Side, Runner. You CAN have it both ways, you know!
Posted by bennie, Thursday, 8 February 2007 9:47:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy