Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: another cricket
Only on a case basis, I hope. There are times when telling the truth is worse than lying.
19 posted on 05/23/2002 1:08:33 PM PDT by Pistias
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: Pistias
That is a very interesting philosophy you have there. First you criticize him for "not thinking about the consequences" when he clearly did. And then you say truth is more hurtful then lies. While that may be the case in some relationships science should be based on provable truth. Not what will make someone feel good.

Did he by any chance pop your bubble?

a.cricket

20 posted on 05/23/2002 1:34:32 PM PDT by another cricket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: Pistias
From the Scientific American rebuttal:

The cost projections Lomborg uses represent one set of estimates, but far more favorable ones exist, too. Given that the additional antiwarming steps that might be taken aren’t yet known—and so their net costs are impossible to state—it is premature to dismiss them as “phenomenally more expensive.”
So, tell us what those steps are, then, and how much they will cost

What would you think of this sales pitch: You really know you need a car, and the car salesperson comes up and says "We're not going to tell you how much this is until you sign on the dotted line and agree to pay us whatever we ask."

This appears to be what the Scientific American editor wants, and only a complete idiot would agree to it.

D

21 posted on 05/23/2002 1:47:51 PM PDT by daviddennis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson