On 12/1/2009 12:40 PM, Steve Pope wrote:
> Rune Allnor<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 1 Des, 19:21, spop...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
>
>>> Don't buy it! Don't let them control the debate.
>
>> Keep the politics out of this.
>
> Um, sorry, posting links to Wall Street Journal articles is
> injecting politics into. Don't blame me.

I strongly disagree. That seems akin to me of the logical fallacy of
"poisoning the well": The WSJ is conservative, therefore this article
must be right wing and therefore unreliable!

Prof. Lindzen is a well-respected researcher at MIT and has been in the
"skeptical" camp for a long time. Perhaps WSJ is one of the few venues
where he can publish. I suggest people assess the content of the
article rather than any perceived reputation of the publisher.

It is apparent that "unbiased" sources are nearly nonexistent these
days, so what one must do is look at info from various sources and
decide on the information for oneself. Usually that means taking info
from both sides of the debate, something few are willing to do any more.

>> In plain English: The climate models aren't good enough.
>
> "Aren't good enough" for what purpose? What standard of
> proof is needed to make a political decision to implement
> more pollution controls? Ultimately this is a political
> decision, isn't it?
>
>> The argument has nothing to do with politics.
>
> Sure it does.
>
> Steve


--
Eric Jacobsen
Minister of Algorithms
Abineau Communications
http://www.abineau.com