jo4hn wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:
jo4hn wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:
jo4hn wrote:
Mark & Juanita wrote:
Swingman wrote:

Larry Jaques wrote:

I've been on the environmental bandwagon for nearly 40 years,
but I no longer call myself an environmentalist because of
what the movement hath wrought. I think ecoterrorists may
outnumber the greenies now. sigh
As a home builder with a recent, alternative construction,
"green" project under my belt, I can guarantee you that more
waste hit the land fills due to its "green" nature then in any
two of my usual traditional construction projects.

.... still marveling at the sheer, unconscious ignorance of many
of the misguided folks who have embraced this "movement" ... all
warm, fuzzy, self congratulatory, and without a clue!

Read something today that makes a lot of sense regarding this.
There are two camps of people, materialists -- those people who
say that there is a material universe which behaves in a
consistent way, and if you study it you can learn the way it
works, and teleologists -- those who say that the universe is an
ideal place. From what I read: "More or less, it exists so
that we humans
can live in it. And human thought is a fundamental force in the
universe. Teleology says that if a mental model is esthetically
pleasing then it must be true. Teleology implies that if you
truly believe in something, itll happen."

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/06/government-by-wishful-thinking/

The people you describe above Swingman are of the latter
persuasion. They don't care if what they want to try hasn't
worked before -- it just wasn't done correctly, they are going
to do it correctly. If the idea of a "green" economy feels
good, by golly, it will be good. Ignore those niggling little
details like more waste or less available resourced -- by golly
it FEELS good!

So the doomsayers on the right believe that doing nothing besides
reciting mantras such as "there ain't no such thing as global
warming", that the problem will go away. And further that there
never was a problem and that scientists lie for any reason. Wow.
Thank you for clearing that up.
The "global warming" "scientists" are engaging in political
activity and using models that have not been validated to support
their politicking. There is a tendency toward "scientism" in our
society--trusting anyone who claims to be a "scientist" without
question. Most sciences are in their infancy--the only ones with
any real maturity are physics and chemistry, with biology getting
there. Climatology is very immature and basing social policy on
its models is about as wise as basing social policy on the ravings
of alchemists or astrologers.

Is that "scientism" or the opposite?

It is scientism. Google that word.

I am getting a lot of the latter
from the right wingers.

What, distrust of climatologists? Skepticism is a necessary part of
the scientific process--anyone who is calling the climatologists
liars is behaving more like a proper scientist than all the folks
who are saying "we should trust them because they are scientists".

Oh and your last sentence is just plain
ignorant meanness and bespeaks much of you.

Oh, now _there_ is a compelling rebuttal if ever I saw one.

The opposite of scientism or anti-scientism if you want. It's the
idea that if one spouts anything long enough and loudly enough, it
will be believed. It will still not be true however. A good example
is calling climatologists liars without any *scientific* proof.

Well, that is exactly what the global warming people are doing, spouting
something loud and long and hoping to be believed. And launching personal
attacks at anyone who questions them.