|
General Random thoughts and ideas. "General" does not mean random drivel, nonsense or inane silliness. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#109
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Science! Science? Science...
I trust corporations to try to make money, and I trust governments to try to govern, though both are capable of corruption and/or incompetence. I don't trust either one to be responsive to all my own best interests, though. I trust Target to sell me a pack of athletic socks and a box of breakfast cereal; I trust the government to arrange for trash pick-up on Friday mornings. Not the other way around. And both are capable of disappointing me.
Last edited by Dad_Scaper; November 11th, 2015 at 05:22 PM. Reason: . . . I trust teachers to try to teach, car mechanics to try to fix cars, etc. Not blind faith, but a little trust. |
#110
|
||||
|
||||
Heh
Do I trust either to do "the right thing"? Not really, no. I trust corporations to profit maximize. I trust governments to do certain things well and other things poorly. Sadly, I find most of my current "trust" in governments more of a "Well crap, no one else is doing it and the government at least wants to try."
~Dysole, noting there is room for altruism on both sides of this spectrum (Elon Musk and Medicaid are the first two examples that came to mind) but that most of the time we really can't rely on it My Twitch Channel where I play Scape and other things My YouTube Channel where the games get uploaded later Dysole's Draft Rankings Map Thread (Not responsible for psychic damage) Customs Battle Reports This sentence is seven words long. This sentence is not seven words long. |
#111
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Science! Science? Science...
Truly, I wasn't trying to start another area to explore or even to elicit responses. It was just a funny thought.
~Aldin, non-binarily He either fears his fate too much or his desserts are small That dares not put it to the touch to gain or lose it all ~James Graham |
#112
|
||||
|
||||
Heh 2.0
Oh come on Aldin. You've played enough CoN to know that no matter how off topic the rhetorical question/theory is at least one person will chime in with their answer whether or not you wanted it. ^_^
~Dysole, never taking advantage of that My Twitch Channel where I play Scape and other things My YouTube Channel where the games get uploaded later Dysole's Draft Rankings Map Thread (Not responsible for psychic damage) Customs Battle Reports This sentence is seven words long. This sentence is not seven words long. |
#113
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Science! Science? Science...
@Dysole
- yeah, you're right. I saw your and DS' responses and started feeling foolish. Reading back over what I wrote it was clear that the responses were inevitable. At the time I wrote it I thought "heh - people are going to read this and feel a bit of bemusement as they spend 10 seconds thinking about it before they move on to other things."
Unintended consequences. ~Aldin, who should be playing Fallout instead He either fears his fate too much or his desserts are small That dares not put it to the touch to gain or lose it all ~James Graham |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Science! Science? Science...
Quote:
Quote:
Climate science isn't a matter of coming up with a new understanding of the basic rules of the universe. It comes down to collecting data and identifying which variable is most likely responsible for causing change. |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Science! Science? Science...
In work, I'm not interested in being a hero. I'm looking to make money at work. If you could make a compelling argument that burning fossil fuels is not a significant cause of global climate change or that such global climate change is an overall negative event, you would make an incredible amount of money. The coal industry would throw money at you. The petroleum industry would follow the coal industry. The Koch brothers would be your best friends. The financial reward in debunking that global climate change is caused by man would be incredible. Unfortunately, no one seems to be able to cash in on this opportunity.
|
#116
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Science! Science? Science...
Quote:
There is far too much money in people who are against scientific discovery and not nearly enough in the opposite. Be polite: Don't put politics or religion in your signature! |
#117
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Science! Science? Science...
Quote:
Really, you have a VW Bus-sized blind spot on this issue. You seem almost constitutionally incapable of recognizing that the people who fund the fights against all these regulations (ostensibly on the grounds of questioning the science) have a massive, massive profit motive. Again, follow the money. This is big tobacco denying the cancer link, all over again. |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Science! Science? Science...
Quote:
There is real money at stake in the global climate change discussion. Coal is still the cheapest way to make electricity. The coal industry has lost many billions in market value due to concerns about CO2 and global climate change. The money available to supporting the same conclusion as everyone else, that global climate change is a problem and that its man made, is very limited. The money that would be available to an overthrow of the current conventional thinking is staggering. |
#119
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Science! Science? Science...
Since we're talking about money - out of curiosity, since I've never actually checked - who is paying to fund climate change studies?
~Aldin, monetarily He either fears his fate too much or his desserts are small That dares not put it to the touch to gain or lose it all ~James Graham |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Science! Science? Science...
Quote:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...denial-effort/ I found this interesting: "From 2003 to 2007, Koch Affiliated Foundations and the ExxonMobil Foundation were "heavily involved" in funding climate change denial efforts. But Exxon hasn't made a publically traceable contribution since 2008, and Koch's efforts dramatically declined, Brulle said. Coinciding with a decline in traceable funding, Brulle found a dramatic rise in the cash flowing to denial organizations from DonorsTrust, a donor-directed foundation whose funders cannot be traced." "In all, 140 foundations funneled $558 million to almost 100 climate denial organizations from 2003 to 2010." They really haven't gotten a good return on this investment. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Book of Science Police | A3n | C3G Legacy Library | 210 | February 10th, 2022 12:02 PM |
My science test. | scottishlad5 | General | 22 | March 10th, 2009 12:39 AM |
Science Help with Polymers | Drumline3469 | General | 10 | November 20th, 2007 05:21 PM |
Help from science people | Drumline3469 | General | 7 | October 11th, 2007 07:25 PM |
For Science and Math Geeks | Kepler | General | 21 | February 9th, 2007 05:45 PM |