Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
I was in San Diego last week, and it was a bit cool for my comfort.
As far as IPCC reports go, they aren't meant to be conservative nor alarmist, but their best predictions based on various data. They give a probable range of outcomes based on the level of uncertainty, again not biased towards optimistic or pessimistic results.
I have more regard for IPCC opinion than other sources primarily because top experts in relevant fields are employed, and it attempts objectivity while largely steering clear of politics. It's the politicians and other leaders of false religion that I hold contempt for as they prey on the fearful to advance their personal objectives. I'm made immune to their manipulation by setting aside fear. Stoicism is achieved by understanding humanity got along with her problems for the thousands of years prior to my arrival, and will get along well after I depart.
|
I have to consider climate scientists in the context of Volkswagen aerodynamicists in the early 1970s.
Climate change was already a 'thing' (it's in my 1974 college text on internal combustion ), and VW had an opportunity to sell a Cd 0.34 Golf/ Rabbit, but manufactured a Cd 0.43 Golf/Rabbit because of contractual obligations with designer Giorgetto Giugiaro, which itself amplified global warming.
The 'scientist' can present the information, and the recipient of the information has the authority not to act upon it.
That's where the money trail might begin.
Although, as they say, ' don't attribute to malfeasance what can be explained by ignorance.'
So far, it's not a global crime to be ignorant.