Heinz Schmitz wrote:
> --- In email@example.com, wayne <lwbittle@...> wrote:
> > Thanks for the references. I don't have the background to follow the
> > discussions in detail but from what I can understand and the
> > drawn it appears that another of the 'skeptics' has been discredited.
> Oh please. Do you people ever stop to think about what you are saying
> sometimes. Should we reject Newton's Gravitational Theory simply
> because he pursued alchemy also?
Hardly a good analogy. Newton's physics stands alone. Lindzen was doing
work in his own "expertise".
> "Environmentalism as Religion"
> by Michael Crichton
> "Although the preachers of environmentalism have been yelling about
> population for fifty years, over the last decade world population
> seems to be taking an unexpected turn. Fertility rates are falling
> almost everywhere. As a result, over the course of my lifetime the
> thoughtful predictions for total world population have gone from a
> high of 20 billion, to 15 billion, to 11 billion (which was the UN
> estimate around 1990) to now 9 billion, and soon, perhaps less. There
> are some who think that world population will peak in 2050 and then
> start to decline. There are some who predict we will have fewer people
> in 2100 than we do today. Is this a reason to rejoice, to say
> halleluiah? Certainly not. Without a pause, we now hear about the
> coming crisis of world economy from a shrinking population. We hear
> about the impending crisis of an aging population. Nobody anywhere
> will say that the core fears expressed for most of my life have turned
> out not to be true. As we have moved into the future, these doomsday
> visions vanished, like a mirage in the desert. They were never
> there---though they still appear, in the future. As mirages do.
Here you quote people who consult future models. By your definition
they can be no more creditable than the climatologist who you disparage
so intently. I find Crichton using controversy to sell books much as
politicians do to get votes;-)
> Okay, so, the preachers made a mistake. They got one prediction wrong;
> they're human. So what. Unfortunately, it's not just one prediction.
> It's a whole slew of them. We are running out of oil. We are running
> out of all natural resources. Paul Ehrlich: 60 million Americans will
> die of starvation in the 1980s. Forty thousand species become extinct
> every year. Half of all species on the planet will be extinct by 2000.
> And on and on and on.
Ehrlich overplayed his hand, there is no doubt. However he was saying
that if we didn't change our ways this could happen. Due to his and
others cries we educated people to reduce family size. We also changed
our way on pollution of the atmosphere and water. I am not sure that he
deserves the label of failure. Perhaps he sang the siren song that
alerted us to change our habits.
> With so many past failures, you might think that environmental
> predictions would become more cautious. But not if it's a religion.
> Remember, the nut on the sidewalk carrying the placard that predicts
> the end of the world doesn't quit when the world doesn't end on the
> day he expects. He just changes his placard, sets a new doomsday date,
> and goes back to walking the streets. One of the defining features of
> religion is that your beliefs are not troubled by facts, because they
> have nothing to do with facts."
I think the nut is carrying a sign that says :"Who me worry?"
Nothing is ever simple.