Originally Posted by darkhorse
Firstly, let's not lose perspective--this discussion began with a reference to a fictional book by Michael Crichton.
Not exactly - this discussion started when you stated that the book made a valid statement about the real world.
Originally Posted by darkhorse
Secondly, I don't claim to be an expert on this subject.
Yes, i think that's one of the annoying parts. You've been filling up this thread with a mainly unrelated issue which actually obscures the science,
and the presentation issues, that we should be talking about.
Originally Posted by darkhorse
So let's see. Are these the type of things you have a problem with...?
Tony Blair:
"1. If what the science tells us about climate change is correct, then unabated it will result in catastrophic consequences for our world.
2. The science, almost certainly, is correct."
Similar scary
science-based scenarios were brought up by your next example... but like Blair he also strove to sound positive notes...
Al Gore
"The solutions are more accessible than people thought," he said. "We can do this."
This is the man of whom the article says: "he was, at times, uncharacteristically funny." - And this while 'scare-mongering', you claim. Could it be that you were sucked in by the sensationalist article title "Global warming called an emergency"?
Are these the type of things you're objecting to? In which case you've proved my point. They're quoting the climate scientists! (And they're seeking out positive and practical routes that we can take
).
As for
The Mayor of Salt Lake City, well, he's the Mayor of Salt Lake City. His science comes from CNN. (But actually, i'm intrigued by what you object to in his parochial little claims. Objections to giant malls? I would've thought you'd approve
). Either way, he's hardly provoking the "mass hysteria" you've been talking about with his derogatory remarks about cars. If he errs in his interpretation of the science, then that only shows how important it is to
understand the scientific claims as fully as possible (before making claims about them either way).
So
yes, the reputable speeches by big politicians make 'scarey' claims - but all of those claims are sourced in science. There's
no exaggeration going on in the claims they're making. Or if there is, you would have to point the finger at the
scientists.
And if you do that, you'll have to know your facts.
Originally Posted by darkhorse
It's far more effective to educate than it is to terrorize.
Exactly - so why hold the spectre of political-exaggeration-for-manipulation-purposes over the GW issue? It's practically non-existant on those terms.
You are conjuring up an unnecessary and unrealistic fear, with regards to GW..
If you've got a problem with the 'fearful' nature of the scientific conclusions, tackle
them instead. Educate yourself