OT: The Greens

Wayne, you might like to broaden your reading a little. Try Site Link
for an analysis of how Crichton has distorted the data.
This whole topic is looking more and more like a rerun of the smoking issue when the smoking companies used similar use of company scientists to muddy the debate so the average public simply became confused and opted for a kind of middle of the road position so that there would be no change in the status quo. Eventually, the data became too overwhelming to be denied. Yes, it is about power and money. Just whose power/money do you think is threatened by the global warming issue?

I also read State of Fear. It was a good read and very thought provoking.
The biggest thing I got out of it was this: Who do you believe?
Global warming is an issue but really most of us can do very little about it.
World poverty is horrific, but can we really do anything?

If we look back from a thousand years into the future, what will we see that we did or could have prevented? Hindsight is powerful, but so is the tree we hit when we are looking back. Assuming we survive that long.

Humans are selfish, cruel and devastating to everything else. Can we change our spots? While it is nice to think so I very much doubt it. We will only change once we have lost what we wanted most.

That said, there are a few of us that really do care and do get things done.
What we need is to "convert" the other dolts into our way of thinking and passion and as a group, humans can and will achieve much.

The earth evolves. Will it purge the annoyance that is humans, or will we change in time?

I think technology has much to answer for. It has made us lazy, careless, selfish and we think we have improved because of it.

I know this is never going to happen, but, if we all worked our own land to feed and clothe us and built our own shelter etc. we would care a lot more for what we damage. Careful Camping is a good way to start as we feel much closer to nature and how it affects us and how we affect it.

Most people in major decision making roles have no idea on nature and the real poverty and hunger.
Bono et al appear to be headline seeking rather than grass roots caring. Does he fly in a plane etc?

In the end "truth". What does it mean and how do we find it?
Global warming and third world poverty are so misquoted that the real truth is dissolved.
I have no answer. Just adding to the problem is expect.

I enjoyed that book too. I would like to check the data he quotes, but I would hardly call the "Union of Concerned Scientists" website a location for a unbiased critical look at Crichton's analysis.

And it is fiction anyway!

Pete

Fine Pete, as long as we don't accept that the plot is fiction but the science is OK, which seems to be hinted at by Wayne. The science is also fiction. I don't expect a group called "Union of Concerned Scientists" to be unbiased. It depends on what you mean by biased. They have formed an opinion and now promote that opinion. As long as the science which led them to that conclusion is unbiased, no problems. Example. The "Wentworth Group" in South Oz have a barrow to push on environment issues. But that doesn't mean their science is not accurate, their concern with their findings leads them to take the public position they do. This is a bit different to the sort of "science" that gets reported from scientists in the Hudson Institute who are the paid guns of the businesses concerned.
It's why we need organizations like the ABC and CSIRO not to have to rely on advertising

"It's why we need organizations like the ABC and CSIRO not to have to rely on advertising".

Although that fact alone doesn't mean they are unbiased in the views they present. For instance the 7.30 report is heavily biased politically.

So what do you think about the current legislation allowing further concentration of media into a few hands - and those networks are all linked to advertising? The balance of views on the ABC is vastly better than one gets from the likes of Andrew Bolt etc. I regularly see Media watch for example criticize coverage of issues on the ABC. How often do you see one section of the Herald Sun group attack another section of the group for its lack of balance? Scrutiny of the ABC is high. There is no check for bias at all on the rest of the media.
What are our chances of getting some positions mandated on the Board of Directors of the Commercial media to ensure balance of coverage, just like the ABC has?

And that bloody Bob Geldof, trys to tell us that all of Africas problems are our fault. Corruption, civil wars, tribal hatred, over population etc, seems they are their own worst enemy..........Lionel