![]() |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
In many fields decisions have to be taken based on the weight of available evidence at that time. Because of the unavoidable time delays in remedying climate damage, delaying until effects are more easily visible may make the situation unrecoverable. There is a precautionary principle here. I would suggest it would be more of a 'crime against humanity' to take no action and possibly wait too late than to take measured and balanced action now. ----------------------------------------- This also raises the issue of what constitutes enough evidence: there has been a concerted effort from the right to deny, distort, and sow doubt in the whole climate field. The tactics (delay, distortion, funding of alternate voices and 'evidence') are similar to those used decades ago by the tobacco companies to counter the emerging (scientific) evidence about the harmfulness of smoking. Part of the strategy is to delay the time when the public will accept that the scientific evidence is unequivocal and overwhelming and that action needs to be taken. The end goal is the same in both cases - preservation of profit margins. That is the real crime in all this.
__________________
i5-2500K @3.3GHz / 8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1600 / Asus P8P67 / GTX-260 (216) / WD 500GB Samsung 22" 1680x1050 / Win7 64 Home Premium CH Combat Stick / CH Pro Throttle / Simped Rudder Pedals Last edited by kendo65; 06-10-2012 at 02:54 PM. |
|
|