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 > Robert Stone and Pandora's Promise > Comments

Robert Stone and Pandora's Promise : Comments

By Noel Wauchope, published 11/10/2013

I found myself disliking the film, for its sins of omission, and manipulative way of discrediting anti nuclear people.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. All
Robert LePage

>"Anyone who quotes from the Cato inst ... cannot be taken seriously."

Anyone who makes a comment like that at makes no attempt to understand the paper and comment on it, cannot be taken seriously.

I did refute your arguments. You just didn't read/understand the refutations.
Posted by Peter Lang, Saturday, 12 October 2013 7:21:04 PM
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 do not see how a free-marketeer would choose any path other than that which maximizes gain. I am interested in why free-marketeers would wish to influence decisions that are taken in the best interests of society rather than responding to those decisions to maximum gain.

Why would the Cato Institute champion fossil-fuels over a path that mitigates global warming other than for the reason that gain is maximized by maintaining the status quo?

I think it's reasonable that Robert has a concern over the Cato Institute given its mission on energy and the environment http://www.cato.org/research/energy-environment :

"Cato’s energy and environment studies are devoted to explaining how energy markets work and promoting policies that leave questions regarding energy consumption, environmental standards, market structure, and technology to the market rather than government planners."

Peter, I think you should explain why the Cato Institute should be taken seriously on what is best for society given this amoral stance. How can the free market, which is amoral on what is best for society's survival, be relied upon to come to correct conclusions as to what is in those best interests in relation to the empirical evidence supporting the CO2 and AGW hypotheses?
Posted by Luciferase, Saturday, 12 October 2013 10:42:54 PM
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. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. All

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