tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post6888472093637799773..comments2023-10-24T04:29:23.693-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: Climate Change: The Three Percent ArgumentAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-24308246386722146572010-01-12T14:57:54.866-07:002010-01-12T14:57:54.866-07:00My game plan for what to do if we take action on c...My game plan for what to do if we take action on climate change and then found that we were mistaken would be to keep all the wind and solar power generated electrical capacity, all the nuclear power, all the substantial increses in efficiency, the massive decrease in polution, the polital freedom that follows from not paying billions of dollars for foreign oil, the freedom of not being forced to go to war in the mideast to maintain the flow of oil, and security of power that is not generated from a finite fossil fuel which must ultimately be exhausted.<br /><br />And I would cry big salty tears because I was marginally less wealthy than I would have been otherwise. Additionally I would be terribly upset that, because of the phase out of coal, I did not have quite as much mercury in my body.<br /><br />PatAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-29202959250723357742009-12-21T03:18:01.643-07:002009-12-21T03:18:01.643-07:00Bill,
Personally, I don't think that "ma...Bill, <br />Personally, I don't think that "maniacs" describes the bunch who would argue that global warming is not imminent. I have been a provocateur for most of my life and want both sides of the argument to get together and work out a plan for the situation <b>if they are wrong</b><br /><br />I believe there is room and time for this but everybody appears to be so "hell bent" to argue the point that no one is prepared to deal with what happens <b>if they are wrong!</b>.<br /><br />If those who fear Global Warming while successfully "buying the insurance policy" owe us a workable solution for the "economic fallout" from their plan.<br /><br />If those who say there is nothing to fear, I would like to see there plan of action if they are wrong. <br /><br />Like, <b>"What now, folks?</b> I want to get an idea of what happens 50 years later and "nobody is talking". I submit that they aren't thinking either . . . just enjoying the "dust up"!<br /><br />And, finally, thanks for visiting my blog and thank you for your comment.<br />.antonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02909850387414677663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-20537498084257497412009-12-21T02:09:57.700-07:002009-12-21T02:09:57.700-07:00Oops, I meant 'if we're right it will be c...Oops, I meant 'if we're right it will be catastrophic not to act, and if we're wrong, no harm done'Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13885851243420089718noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-62860122047433309732009-12-21T02:07:26.703-07:002009-12-21T02:07:26.703-07:00Hey Anton, great blog. With respect I have to disa...Hey Anton, great blog. With respect I have to disagree with your line of argument, though. Not all people who disbelieve in AGW are reckless maniacs, or who are too indifferent to care what happens to the future of the planet. This line of thought - 'We should put all our money & scientific resources into combating AGW because if we're wrong it will be catastrophic!' is just a version of Pascal's wager (as any atheist should realise). Unless the science is settled and indisputable (which it clearly isn't), there are big risks with this approach. I worry that too much money, intellectual and political resources are being spent on combatting AGW at the expense of other, more pressing issues - AIDS, overpopulation, nuclear proliferation, water security, etc. Believe me, it's not because I don't care about the Earth that I am an AGW skeptic (NOT 'denier' - a dangerously loaded term!)Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13885851243420089718noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-26844549161088961192009-12-12T10:56:59.033-07:002009-12-12T10:56:59.033-07:00Typo in your post: "The relevant question to ...Typo in your post: "The relevant question to answer is the human concentration to the change in overall greenhouse gas emissions." I think you meant "contribution" instead of "concentration."Lippardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16826768452963498005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-7063740992425995502009-12-11T07:28:44.779-07:002009-12-11T07:28:44.779-07:00It will be the sorrowful task left up to my descen...It will be the sorrowful task left up to my descendants to inform the naysayers descendants why there is only so much tillable land left on our earth and they are not welcome on the high grounds. <br /><br />Alonzo, glad you used your "bucket" example. If the naysayers won't understand it they are just plain stupid and ignorant!antonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02909850387414677663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-40858292136397296442009-12-10T15:47:54.517-07:002009-12-10T15:47:54.517-07:00It seems like "anonymous" has had a lot ...It seems like "anonymous" has had a lot to say in the past week or so. <br />Flame and run. Now move along little anon, /b/ is calling you for dinner.Matt Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17476827778760803809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-38950555735141403922009-12-10T13:11:44.764-07:002009-12-10T13:11:44.764-07:00Anonymous
having "atheist" in the blog ...<b>Anonymous</b><br /><br /><i>having "atheist" in the blog title is about as self righteous as having "christian" in the blog title. as is being such makes your opinion so much more valid</i><br /><br />Actually, I have stated several times in this blog that being an atheist has nothing to do with one's ability to engage in moral reasoning. Being an 'atheist' ethicist is as relevant as being a 'black' president or a 'female' judge. It does not have any relevance at all.<br /><br />However, even though being black has nothing to do with being president, having a black president is an important part of combatting the bigotry of those who hold that blacks are too inferior to whites to be president.<br /><br />And having an atheist ethicist is an important part of combatting the bigotry of those who hold that atheism is incompatible with morality - that morality requires religion.<br /><br />That is why I have the term 'atheist' in the title.Alonzo Fyfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-13312466932683027022009-12-10T12:15:21.184-07:002009-12-10T12:15:21.184-07:00having "atheist" in the blog title is ab...having "atheist" in the blog title is about as self righteous as having "christian" in the blog title. as is being such makes your opinion so much more validAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-25452679006801072342009-12-10T11:40:33.306-07:002009-12-10T11:40:33.306-07:00also looks like the author ignores the news >&l...also looks like the author ignores the news ><Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-61990784359507259962009-12-10T11:39:13.330-07:002009-12-10T11:39:13.330-07:00lol this post has fail written all over itlol this post has fail written all over itAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com