CARBON TAX-It's Started!

[flyingfox]

Herding Cats and Sceptics.

RATpin, teresa, other anti-science contributors. T. L. Cardwell is a power station worker. Apart from the obvious confused nonsense about steam from cooling towers and 96% thermal efficiency of his coal fired power stations, he has added nothing to the debate except his curious opinion. This subject cannot be understood on the basis of such tripe. The idea that burning fossil fuel can be done without CO2 emmissions should give you a clue to the verasity of his letter. Collecting or containing carbon and CO2 from a process by any method whatsoever, does not diminish the fact of it's production in the first place or solve the problem of it's disposal. Likewise, just because a popular 'letter to the editor' is 'going around as an email' or is repeated ad nauseum, does not give it any more substance as to it's value or correctness. The fact that so many people actually repeat, quote and forward such letters is not only an indictment of standards of scientific education in our schools, but also of the limited ability of so many to separate any form of fact from fiction or opinion. I, for instance, hold the opinion that 'god does not exist'. That opinion may have a large following by many others, but it doesn't have any scientific research or credibility to back it. My opinion on that subject is purely based on personal or borrowed anecdotal observations. It is possible that another opinion based also on anecdotal observations could arrive at exactly the opposite conclusion to mine, therefore suggesting 'that god does exist'. Look at the vast hordes of 'god botherers' and 'crystal gazers' peddling their beliefs from Abenaki shamanism to Zen Budhism or new-age spiritualism. All fun stuff if you are so inclined. However 'creationists', 'holy warriors' and 'snake-oil salesmen' are not so philosophically far apart. (Nor are oil industry executives who don't like 'science' which may cause consumers to shun their products in favour of more environmentally friendly energy. Lord Monkton is a hired gun for the oil industry and has been paid millions to muddy the waters with spurious arguments and fake scientific web sites. He personally is not qualified in any scientific discipline, though he does hold qualifications in 'The Classics' and marketing. His role in confusing scientific debate should not be underestimated. He has previously been a spin doctor for the Vatican and later managed the damage control for the Exxon Valdez oil spill. It was his expertise which saved Exxon billions of dollars in compensation and left many Alaskans in financial ruin. More recently his utterences on the BP Gulf oil spill have followed the same pattern.) If 'proof' doesn't involve scientific observation and measurements, it can be no more than a subjective or 'belief' based view. 'Flat Earthers' eventually went to ground under the weight of scientific evidence. If you can't understand how science works, start looking for a burrow now. You are going to need somewhere to hide your eventual and inevitable embarrassment. Sure scientific research has some hiccups and misinterpretations along the way. That is why peer review and cross referencing is so critical in reaching scientific concensus. But as the weight of evidence builds, knowledge is gained and made available for new determinations and thinking. Ignorance is so demeaning in an educated society. Swallowing every excuse for ignoring solid scientific findings is childish at best. And there is no point in placing scientific evidence before people who have a zealous and willful determination to ignore it. Looking in the wrong places for scientific research and discussion is laziness of the highest order and would never be tolerated by a trained researcher. The internet has few signposts and finding reputable sources is not automatically assured. It is a discipline in itself. Science is published in a very small group of web sites. Mischievous commentary and misrepresentation of those reports and discussions are sadly more common. It is the nature of the internet as an open forum that much of it's comment and material is at the very best, apocryphal. Scepticism is actually a scientific notion which holds unproven ideas to be nothing more than that until backed by clearly repeatable evidence. Some people contributing to this thread are claiming to be 'sceptics' when in fact they are devout adherents to a worship of 'scientific blindness'. Science is the system and force which is raising us out of the mysticism of prehistory. If you don't wish to be 'raised' that is your choice, but don't hold back those who are heading that way by deception and obstructionism. Science is not a political persuasion either, so keep your politics out of the mathmatics, chemistry and physics. If tea-leaves, tarrot cards and the mark-1 eyeball are all that reside in your toolbag, enjoy the illusion of your precious haven while you can. The 'Galileos' of our time are at your door.