(oldguy12) wrote:
I know many of my fellow conservatives are skeptical of the science behind climate change. Let's assume for a second that you agree that the climate is getting warmer but doubt we know why or what to do.
CT scan comes back and that dot on your brain we've been following for 10 years is rapidly growing. Doc tells you it's brain cancer and recommends chemo, radiation or surgery. You ask him how you got it..."not sure but it'll kill you if we don't do something." You ask how long you have, "not sure, sometimes these things grow quickly, sometimes slowly." You're not comfortable with his knowledge - he can't explain how you got it or how long you've got to live, so you wisely get another opinion. This doc mostly agrees but says you only have 1 year left...so you get another opinion...same deal only this doc says 5 years. Now you're really confused and continue to seek opinions from other experts. After seeing 10 docs 9 of them tell you you're dying from brain cancer, they don't know how you got it but it will kill you and their treatments all cause harm.
Do you;
1. ignore the science and hope it goes away
2. ignore the 90% and go with the 10%
3. admit you don't know as much as the docs, say your prayers and get treated?
CT scan comes back and that dot on your brain we've been following for 10 years is rapidly growing. Doc tells you it's brain cancer and recommends chemo, radiation or surgery. You ask him how you got it..."not sure but it'll kill you if we don't do something." You ask how long you have, "not sure, sometimes these things grow quickly, sometimes slowly." You're not comfortable with his knowledge - he can't explain how you got it or how long you've got to live, so you wisely get another opinion. This doc mostly agrees but says you only have 1 year left...so you get another opinion...same deal only this doc says 5 years. Now you're really confused and continue to seek opinions from other experts. After seeing 10 docs 9 of them tell you you're dying from brain cancer, they don't know how you got it but it will kill you and their treatments all cause harm.
Do you;
1. ignore the science and hope it goes away
2. ignore the 90% and go with the 10%
3. admit you don't know as much as the docs, say your prayers and get treated?
August 20, 2011 12:39:21 PM CDT
and...
(oldguy12) wrote:
The research & evidence behind climate change is as at least as compelling as the science behind;
1. "abstinence only" works
2. death penalty is an effective deterrent for other criminals
3. supply side is preferred over keynesian economics to end a recession
4. SH had WMDs and needed to go
5. UHC will destroy the economy
6. concealed carry laws reduce crime
7. Patriot Act prevents domestic terrorism
8. water-boarding works
9. fracking is safe
10. God exists
I'm a conservative and, to varying degrees, I believe in all of these. I acknowledge that the research & evidence is\was debatable on 1-9, and that #10 requires faith, by definition the lack of scientific proof. I'm ok with that. I'm ok with not having 100% certainty in many of the political positions I take. We weigh all sides, consider the options and potential ends results. We make the best decisions we can given the information available. Sometimes we get it right, sometimes we don't. In most cases if we're wrong there's time to change course and avert a disaster.
VP Cheney allegedly said that if there was a 1% chance Pakistan was helping AQ gets nukes, we had to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response. Why not the same with climate change?
1. "abstinence only" works
2. death penalty is an effective deterrent for other criminals
3. supply side is preferred over keynesian economics to end a recession
4. SH had WMDs and needed to go
5. UHC will destroy the economy
6. concealed carry laws reduce crime
7. Patriot Act prevents domestic terrorism
8. water-boarding works
9. fracking is safe
10. God exists
I'm a conservative and, to varying degrees, I believe in all of these. I acknowledge that the research & evidence is\was debatable on 1-9, and that #10 requires faith, by definition the lack of scientific proof. I'm ok with that. I'm ok with not having 100% certainty in many of the political positions I take. We weigh all sides, consider the options and potential ends results. We make the best decisions we can given the information available. Sometimes we get it right, sometimes we don't. In most cases if we're wrong there's time to change course and avert a disaster.
VP Cheney allegedly said that if there was a 1% chance Pakistan was helping AQ gets nukes, we had to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response. Why not the same with climate change?
August 20, 2011 1:52:22 PM CDT
No comments:
Post a Comment