Sat, Feb 28, 2015, 2:55 PM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Altria Group Inc. Message Board

  • btdt100 btdt100 Dec 26, 2009 7:43 AM Flag

    Climate Gate - Environmentalism

    http://www.tennessean.com/article/20091213/COLUMNIST0110/912130363/1007/OPINION

    Truth is not determined by majority vote. Any talk of a "consensus" in science is best not taken as the final word. As Somerset Maugham once put it, "If 40 million people say a foolish thing it does not become a wise one, but the wise man is foolish to give them the lie."

    Climatology is a science, not to be confused with environmentalism. The heart of environmentalism is not to be found in the natural sciences. It is ideology and nothing more. That is why it ends in "-ism."

    Environmentalism is itself not a monolith, but its dominant strand is distinctly statist in character. As such, its main nemesis is the science of economics, not climatology or any of the other natural sciences.

    A sound understanding of economics is all that is needed to discredit the emerging interventionist social agenda of the environmental movement. The methods that they recommend cannot deliver the results that they promise.

    It is common to hear accusations of "junk science" hurled against environmentalists, particularly those touting the dangers of climate change.

    These accusations might be well taken and, if so, would be sufficient to derail the CO2 "Cap and Trade" juggernaut. But the real objective of the environmental movement appears to be in the social realm. That means the control of people, with environmental controls serving merely as the instrument.

    We have had considerable domestic and international experience with governments that micromanage the lives of their residents. The more governments interfere in our lives, the more things go wrong. The people are poorer, less healthy and less able to adapt to the vagaries of nature and of other men. If ever a science were settled, this would be it.

    It should be obvious that each individual's actions affect the rest of us to some greater or lesser extent. The same is true with respect to the environment around us. Complex interactions present us with great regularities, as well as many unexpected events. It has always been so; and we can expect it to remain so.

    continued

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • ###############
      <<It is a silly government regulation. There is no scientific evidence, only statistical evidence, that pouring water on a fire has any effect.>>

      And vermit really thinks people will believe he went to MIT!!
      #################

      And rodentess, apparently unable to understand simple sarcasm thinks that people will believe she could pass the GED exam.

    • <<It is a silly government regulation. There is no scientific evidence, only statistical evidence, that pouring water on a fire has any effect.>>

      And vermit really thinks people will believe he went to MIT!!

    • SHUT UP STUPID LADY

    • <<Then why are they pouring millions of gallons of water on the fuel rods? >>

      It is a silly government regulation. There is no scientific evidence, only statistical evidence, that pouring water on a fire has any effect.

      And why does the government impose such an emibilic regulation? It was imposed on behalf of the members of the firefighters' union, a public employee union, to create jobs for their members.

      For millions o f years there were no fire-hoses pouring water on fires, and Miother Nature did just fine.

    • <<Then why are they pouring millions of gallons of water on the fuel rods? Obviously they are subscribing to the age-old maxim, "Fight Toxins with Toxins." (Or is it, Fight Texans with Toxins?) >>

      By your logic, they are trying to destroy the life of the fuel rods.

    • <<Crackeress can't spell two thirds of the words in the English language, so how can she tell when someone is 'illiterate'? >>

      By the stupid things they say, such as suggesting that CO2, much less water, would be a toxin as example. Knowing how to spell a word means little when you cannot conceptualize its meaning, even after having it provided to you.

      What totally blew over your brain about the water was in safety assessments of nuclear systems. Two very very obvious mistakes were made regarding those Japanese nuclear systems, and those mistakes would be applicable to all such systems. It is not about water.

    • Let me guess--you think that it would be very hard to sleep on that long journey, and thus the astronauts will die of AIDS before they could ever possibly get to Mars.
      ----------------------------
      Keep guessing vermit. What I think is that you are one of the most illiterate idiots I have ever met.

    • rodentess <<Have you figured out yet why we cannot and will not go to Mars? >>

      Let me guess--you think that it would be very hard to sleep on that long journey, and thus the astronauts will die of AIDS before they could ever possibly get to Mars.

    • Please explain what has all this tree-hugging got to do with Altria the best tobacco company in the world?

    • All of thebooks for the particle physics course are more than two years old:
      ----------------
      Take the issue up with Half Price books vermit. I am more than happy to sell them to whoever delivers cash.

    • View More Messages
 
MO
56.29+0.20(+0.36%)Feb 27 4:00 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.