Reply #20: You didn't answer the question. [View All]

[NNadir]

Why is this not a surprise?

I am quite satisfied with the number of minds I have changed, and am always happy to interact with these individuals further.

There is another class of people who behave rather like parrots who cannot even change their solgans, never mind their withered minds, since change requires not just a functional intellect - but it also takes a breathe of vision, courage, and an ability to assume risk.

When we speak of such weak people, we can recognize quite clearly how poor their thinking is, we see that they cannot even formulate a response to a question that bears on the question itself.

For instance, I ask, what would you do to arrest global warming, and we get a vague bunch of blather like something out of a freshman Political "Science" course about recognizing a political problem. Now if people drive around to discuss the politics of global climate change until the coastline reaches Colorado, the seas will still rise.

The issue involves energy, not useless chatter by scientific illiterates. Energy in the universe is conserved in things like chemical potential energy (most fossil fuels), gravatational (tital energy), nuclear potential energy (geothermal energy and nuclear energy) and in expressed kinetically via nuclear, particles, and nuclear and solar radiation.

One can have as many discussions as one wishes of the psychology or as many social "science" seminars as can stomache, but none of this with solve a single problem of energy.

The problem of global climate change is involved far more in the chemistry of atmospheres, the entropy of mixing, materials science, geology, meterology, electrical, mechanical and nuclear engineeering far more than it is involved in a the meetings of the freshmen physcology majors club in some dreary student center in some out of the way university.

In short, it is a matter for grown-ups who are educated with respect to the technical issues and can intelligently weigh technical responses solutions. Such a person, a grown up, would answer the question by saying, if he or she so believed, "I believe that we should spaceships to collect solar waves and beam down to earth as microwaves." This shows that - whether or not the idea is a workable or desirable - the proponent has seriously thought about the issue and is prepared to engage in a discussion in which he or she will defend his or her point until the merits are either proved or disproved.

Then we have the Greenpeace website: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/

Here is the program there, more than half negative statements, with any positive statements blankly vague. In each case, I have asked bit of balderdash blather with my simpl questions that, since they will not be answered reveal Greenpeacers to be sloganeering, self-absorbed, middle class magical thinking twits with no practical experience of the worl:


Stop climate change How?
Save our seas How?
Protect ancient forests How?
Say no to genetic engineering Why?
Eliminate toxic chemicals Why?
End the nuclear threat Why?
Encourage sustainable trade With Whom?
Abolish nuclear weapons How?


Speak loudly and carry no stick.