<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.1.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The flip side of the Precautionary Principle</title>
	<link>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580</link>
	<description>A project of the International Society for Individual Liberty</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:23:36 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Solar Power Cuts</title>
		<link>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-345433</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 03:28:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-345433</guid>
					<description>&lt;strong&gt;Solar Power For Homes - Take Advantage Of The Growing Trend ?&lt;/strong&gt;

Solar power for homes is becoming a major alternative to fossil fuels as costs go down in solar technology and up in traditional fuel sources.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p><strong>Solar Power For Homes - Take Advantage Of The Growing Trend ?</strong></p>
	<p>Solar power for homes is becoming a major alternative to fossil fuels as costs go down in solar technology and up in traditional fuel sources.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Jim Davidson</title>
		<link>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-43269</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:20:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-43269</guid>
					<description>It would be ludicrous to suppose that current trends, which fail to keep pace with some of the most dramatic shifts in temperature in the geological record, are going to turn Earth into Venus, ever.  In a system as large as Earth, a huge number of factors compensate for small variations in temperature.  Even global warming alarmists note that shutting down the Gulf stream with fresh water from the Greenland ice sheet would result in dramatically lower temperatures.  

Climate modeling is extremely complex, and so is the Earth-Sun system.  I would suggest that using the Venus example as a horror show, or the Mars case - which once had a wet warm period in its climate, we have evidence to suggest - is rather like shaking a hobgoblin at the public.  Good to motivate panic, as Mencken noted, but not as good if you want carefully reasoned thought.  

Thank you for approving my comment, reading it, and giving kudos.  If there is one further thing I should wish to add, it is to compare the central planning demagogues to the Romans.

As Calgacus is reputed to have said, &quot;They make a desert and call it peace.&quot;

Regards,

Jim</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>It would be ludicrous to suppose that current trends, which fail to keep pace with some of the most dramatic shifts in temperature in the geological record, are going to turn Earth into Venus, ever.  In a system as large as Earth, a huge number of factors compensate for small variations in temperature.  Even global warming alarmists note that shutting down the Gulf stream with fresh water from the Greenland ice sheet would result in dramatically lower temperatures.  </p>
	<p>Climate modeling is extremely complex, and so is the Earth-Sun system.  I would suggest that using the Venus example as a horror show, or the Mars case - which once had a wet warm period in its climate, we have evidence to suggest - is rather like shaking a hobgoblin at the public.  Good to motivate panic, as Mencken noted, but not as good if you want carefully reasoned thought.  </p>
	<p>Thank you for approving my comment, reading it, and giving kudos.  If there is one further thing I should wish to add, it is to compare the central planning demagogues to the Romans.</p>
	<p>As Calgacus is reputed to have said, &#8220;They make a desert and call it peace.&#8221;</p>
	<p>Regards,</p>
	<p>Jim
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Thomas L. Knapp</title>
		<link>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-43124</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2007 23:06:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-43124</guid>
					<description>Jim,

I agree that it is ludicrous to &quot;suppose that a runaway greenhouse situation is impending.&quot; It is not, however, ludicrous to hypothesize that current climate trends might result in that if not interrupted, and then to try to prove or disprove the hypothesis. As &quot;skeptics&quot; are fond of pointing out, climate modeling is an incredibly complex endeavor -- and that cuts in every direction, including the direction the &quot;skeptics&quot; lean toward and then use the same modeling paradigm they've condemned elsewhere to pull others in.

As for the rest of your comment, you said what I've been trying to say ... only you said it better.

Regards,
Tom Knapp</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Jim,</p>
	<p>I agree that it is ludicrous to &#8220;suppose that a runaway greenhouse situation is impending.&#8221; It is not, however, ludicrous to hypothesize that current climate trends might result in that if not interrupted, and then to try to prove or disprove the hypothesis. As &#8220;skeptics&#8221; are fond of pointing out, climate modeling is an incredibly complex endeavor &#8212; and that cuts in every direction, including the direction the &#8220;skeptics&#8221; lean toward and then use the same modeling paradigm they&#8217;ve condemned elsewhere to pull others in.</p>
	<p>As for the rest of your comment, you said what I&#8217;ve been trying to say &#8230; only you said it better.</p>
	<p>Regards,<br />
Tom Knapp
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Jim Davidson</title>
		<link>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-43123</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2007 22:53:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-43123</guid>
					<description>It is utterly ludicrous to suppose that a runaway greenhouse situation is impending.  Earth is not about to turn into Venus.  At most, it might, possibly, in a few centuries, get as warm as it was when the coal beds of the Carboniferous period were laid down.  More likely, the minor exacerbations of the recent increase in Solar output that characterize the contemporary maximum are going to be wanted, desperately, when the cycle kicks back over to conditions like the Maunder minimum.  The Earth is a very big system, and it is part of an even bigger Solar System, and the evidence for a Venus-like result is extremely scant on the ground.

Libertarians have a large number of tools and tricks in their bag.  One of these is decentralization.  The free market makes a lot more choices available, and individuals take intelligent choices more adeptly than central planners can.  There are a legion of technologies available for reducing carbon emissions, reducing global temperatures through various types of energy production (OTEC - bringing cold water to the surface; 2 mile high chimneys producing power with tornadic winds and fresh water through condensation), and jumping off the grid using solar, wind, and other technologies too numerous to list.  

We also have more than enough time - centuries - in which to circumvent the government's bans on low cost access to space and engage in active reductions in Solar input by building large, cheap mirrors with extraterrestrial materials.  What we do not have is any reason to abandon private property and individual liberty to the last desperate scheme of dirigistes.

The cause of much of the deforestation and pollution on the planet is centrally planned government.  Externally imposed and coercive forms of government should be opposed and blotted out, in the name of making our environment safer from the worst polluters.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>It is utterly ludicrous to suppose that a runaway greenhouse situation is impending.  Earth is not about to turn into Venus.  At most, it might, possibly, in a few centuries, get as warm as it was when the coal beds of the Carboniferous period were laid down.  More likely, the minor exacerbations of the recent increase in Solar output that characterize the contemporary maximum are going to be wanted, desperately, when the cycle kicks back over to conditions like the Maunder minimum.  The Earth is a very big system, and it is part of an even bigger Solar System, and the evidence for a Venus-like result is extremely scant on the ground.</p>
	<p>Libertarians have a large number of tools and tricks in their bag.  One of these is decentralization.  The free market makes a lot more choices available, and individuals take intelligent choices more adeptly than central planners can.  There are a legion of technologies available for reducing carbon emissions, reducing global temperatures through various types of energy production (OTEC - bringing cold water to the surface; 2 mile high chimneys producing power with tornadic winds and fresh water through condensation), and jumping off the grid using solar, wind, and other technologies too numerous to list.  </p>
	<p>We also have more than enough time - centuries - in which to circumvent the government&#8217;s bans on low cost access to space and engage in active reductions in Solar input by building large, cheap mirrors with extraterrestrial materials.  What we do not have is any reason to abandon private property and individual liberty to the last desperate scheme of dirigistes.</p>
	<p>The cause of much of the deforestation and pollution on the planet is centrally planned government.  Externally imposed and coercive forms of government should be opposed and blotted out, in the name of making our environment safer from the worst polluters.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Thomas L. Knapp</title>
		<link>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-43090</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2007 19:22:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-43090</guid>
					<description>John,

Actually, &quot;The Great Global Warming Swindle&quot; was completely discredited in mere days. When the current data didn't fit the filmmaker's desires, old data was used. When old data didn't fit either, data was simply forged from whole cloth and then its provenance mislabeled.

Jarrett,

The data is the data. You can like it or not like it, but it is what it is.

Rocky,

I agree -- concentration of state power is a bigger threat than global warming.

Regards,
Tom</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>John,</p>
	<p>Actually, &#8220;The Great Global Warming Swindle&#8221; was completely discredited in mere days. When the current data didn&#8217;t fit the filmmaker&#8217;s desires, old data was used. When old data didn&#8217;t fit either, data was simply forged from whole cloth and then its provenance mislabeled.</p>
	<p>Jarrett,</p>
	<p>The data is the data. You can like it or not like it, but it is what it is.</p>
	<p>Rocky,</p>
	<p>I agree &#8212; concentration of state power is a bigger threat than global warming.</p>
	<p>Regards,<br />
Tom
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Rocky Frisco</title>
		<link>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-43081</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2007 18:07:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-43081</guid>
					<description>Tom, what I personally think is wrong with your analogy is the cliff. Your little push that causes the rock to fall off the cliff is only significant if there is a cliff. Your cliff is entirely fictional, a factor introduced for the sole purpose of making that little push significant. This makes the whole scenario very suspect. The &quot;End of the World&quot; concept has been stampeding humans into terribly bad decisions for thousands of years, usually contributing to the abuse of power. Any time it raises its head, it should set off your bullshit detector. Let me suggest that you ignore the story and concentrate on the kind of action that is proposed to fix the problem. Isn't it designed to further empower those who are already in power? Won't the attempts to fix a possibly fictitious problem further disempower the freedom of the individual? I suggest that the concentration of coercive power in the hands of government is far more dangerous than carbon dioxide.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Tom, what I personally think is wrong with your analogy is the cliff. Your little push that causes the rock to fall off the cliff is only significant if there is a cliff. Your cliff is entirely fictional, a factor introduced for the sole purpose of making that little push significant. This makes the whole scenario very suspect. The &#8220;End of the World&#8221; concept has been stampeding humans into terribly bad decisions for thousands of years, usually contributing to the abuse of power. Any time it raises its head, it should set off your bullshit detector. Let me suggest that you ignore the story and concentrate on the kind of action that is proposed to fix the problem. Isn&#8217;t it designed to further empower those who are already in power? Won&#8217;t the attempts to fix a possibly fictitious problem further disempower the freedom of the individual? I suggest that the concentration of coercive power in the hands of government is far more dangerous than carbon dioxide.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Jarret Wollstein</title>
		<link>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-42966</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2007 03:55:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-42966</guid>
					<description>I am personally not even convinced that the &quot;global warming&quot; that has taken place over the last century is a significant or important departure from the natural cycle.

Historically we have had even warmer periods. Also solar activity seems to be high right now, which could account for the warming.

Second, the most reasonable projections I've seen on warming are at most a few degrees in the next 50 years, which would merely take us to a &quot;global optimium&quot; climate. 

Finally, and most important, where does there exist a proven climate model that has successfully predicted temperature variations for 10 years into the future, much less 50, 100, or 1,000 years? To the best of my understanding, no such model exists. Indeed, most models I've seen can't even predict temperatures 6 months in the future, and are incredible oversimplifications.

-- Jarret Wollstein</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I am personally not even convinced that the &#8220;global warming&#8221; that has taken place over the last century is a significant or important departure from the natural cycle.</p>
	<p>Historically we have had even warmer periods. Also solar activity seems to be high right now, which could account for the warming.</p>
	<p>Second, the most reasonable projections I&#8217;ve seen on warming are at most a few degrees in the next 50 years, which would merely take us to a &#8220;global optimium&#8221; climate. </p>
	<p>Finally, and most important, where does there exist a proven climate model that has successfully predicted temperature variations for 10 years into the future, much less 50, 100, or 1,000 years? To the best of my understanding, no such model exists. Indeed, most models I&#8217;ve seen can&#8217;t even predict temperatures 6 months in the future, and are incredible oversimplifications.</p>
	<p>&#8211; Jarret Wollstein
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: John A. deLaubenfels</title>
		<link>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-42884</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:34:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.isil.org/channels/archives/7580#comment-42884</guid>
					<description>Tom,

The documentary &quot;The Great Global Warming Swindle&quot; (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9005566792811497638&amp;#38;q=Global%20Warming%20Swindle&amp;#38;hl=en ) pretty much cuts into little ribbons the assertion that human activity significantly affects the earth's temperature.  What axe are you trying to grind by claiming otherwise?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Tom,</p>
	<p>The documentary &#8220;The Great Global Warming Swindle&#8221; (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9005566792811497638&amp;q=Global%20Warming%20Swindle&amp;hl=en ) pretty much cuts into little ribbons the assertion that human activity significantly affects the earth&#8217;s temperature.  What axe are you trying to grind by claiming otherwise?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
