Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Americans never seem to do well with Bob McKeown.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
GirlinContempt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-15-06 11:00 PM
Original message
Americans never seem to do well with Bob McKeown.
Some Canadians don't either, but I really notice it with Americans. Poor guys.

Bob McKeown: LET ME READ A COUPLE OF QUOTES TO YOU AND JUST GET YOUR RESPONSE TO THE ESSENTIAL MESSAGE OF THESE. FIRST ONE, “SCIENTIFIC UNCERTAINTY IS NO REASON TO DELAY TAKING APPROPRIATE ACTION. GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE IS A SERIOUS ISSUE AND THE CURRENT LACK OF SCIENTIFIC, ECONOMIC AND TECHNICAL CERTAINTY IS NOT A REASON FOR INACTION.” HOW WOULD YOU RESPOND TO THAT MESSAGE?

Dr. Patrick Michaels: That depends upon the level of scientific uncertainty and what our knowledge is. I would argue that...

Bob McKeown: GIVEN WHAT YOU KNOW ABOUT THIS ISSUE WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT?

Dr. Patrick Michaels: I have to answer it in more depth than a sound bite. What I know about this issue is that the family of our climate models produces linear warming. We have a linear warming and it's at the low end of the range. And therefore that gives you much more time. It gives you time to invest and do things. That's all I can tell you. Those are the only facts I have at my disposal to answer your question.

Bob McKeown: LET ME TRY ANOTHER ONE HERE. “REPUTABLE SCIENCE CANNOT BE IGNORED. THE SCIENCE ISN'T COMPLETE BUT SCIENCE IS NEVER COMPLETE. PRECAUTIONARY ACTION IS NECESSARY IF WE ARE TO AVOID THE GREATER RISK OF THE EVIDENCE MOUNTING TO THE POINT WHERE DRACONIAN ACTION IS UNAVOIDABLE.”

Dr. Patrick Michaels: That's an argument called the precautionary principle. If we believed in the precautionary principle we wouldn't have an automobile. We wouldn't have vaccines. We wouldn't have antibiotics. I think more alternative argument is that a society that is in fact going to "do something" is going to do it anyway because it's going to become more efficient.

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/denialmachine/index.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC