ok so case one -- they are not the driving force and we do nothing -- outcome neutral case two -- they are and we do some remediation --outcome acceptable case three -- they are and we do nothing -- outcome unacceptable case four -- they are not and we do something -- some financial losses
I am in favor of #2 and think the magnitude of the potential consequences of #3 means that its risk far outweighs the risk of #4, which would be a problem but not catastrophic. On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 6:24 AM, Scott Stroz <boyz...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think you missed my point. > > It was stated: > > 'If we take measures to do something about GW, but then discover > it wasn't real, how much will we regret that?' > > I was merely pointing out that I have heard others use the same logic when > discussing God. 'If you spend your whole life devoted to God and in the > end, > there is not one, would you regret it?' > > IMHO, me going 'green' will have about as much impact on the Earth as my > religious beliefs.....not much at all. I am not convinced that humans are > the driving force in the climate changes. > > > On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 8:17 AM, Dana <dana.tier...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Otherwise known as Rene Descartes' "Le Pari," or "The Wager." > > > > I don't see that "bleeding hearts" would care either way. I personally > > think that you cannot talk yourself into believing in God and that anyone > > who does so out of self-interest is probably committing a greater sin > than > > unbelief. > > > > However. > > > > Your religious beliefs and mine are a personal matter that probably > affect > > nobody else. When George Bush applies magical thinking to environmental > > matters and calls it religion, millions of people pay the price. > > > > On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 5:42 AM, Scott Stroz <boyz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Funny, I have heard people use the same logic about believing in God. > > > 'There is a chance there is a God, so why not believe just to make sure > > you > > > are covered'. I cannot imagine how the bleeding hearts would react to > > > that. > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 12:21 AM, Gruss Gott <grussg...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > RoMunn wrote: > > > > > Global warming is not a myth, it is a worldwide con perpetrated by > > > > shysters > > > > > like ALGORE. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think most people would agree that the Earth is warmer and that the > > > > climate is different, e.g., arctic ice melt, et al. > > > > > > > > So the simple questions for humans are: Is this change a threat or > not? > > > > > > > > Which brings us to these questions: > > > > > > > > (1.) If we learn that GW is real and we're all about to die, will we > > > > comfortable knowing we may have done something but didn't? > > > > > > > > and/or > > > > > > > > (2.) If we take measures to do something about GW, but then discover > > > > it wasn't real, how much will we regret that? > > > > > > > > - ANSWER - > > > > Doing a comparative analysis I will pick #2 and live with my regret > > > > rather than #1 where I will die with it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:283187 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
