Junk Science as a Policy Tool

I like your terminology and borrowed it for my title. Global warming is a fact as far as the public is concerned; that 2006 was one of the hottest years on record will reinforce this.

The global warming thing is a crock IMO. Maybe my opinion is influenced by the fact that its proponents use intellectually dishonest means to assert its truth (a la Michael Moore).

Even if it is true that humans are causing the earth to warm, as my friend pointed out, it's too late to undo it so we might as well buy more shorts and enjoy it.

However, one effect of the global warming scare is to encourage us to use less foreign oil, and I am all for that. I don't care about sweaty pengiuns and homeless polar bears, but I do care about American boys dying so the rest of us can have $1.99/gallon gas.

I want to emphasize that I don't believe the oversimplified, political arguments that 1. We invaded Iraq so we could steal their oil, or 2. We in any way deserved the 9/11 attacks.

However, oil was a major factor in the Iraq War- not so we could steal it (we've paid a hell of a price, haven't we?), but as part of our overall need to have that region stable.

Additionally, Osama himself lists among his chief grievances against the US our support of and military closeness with/presence in the Saudi kingdom.

I am not blaming our current administration for these facts of life- they have been pillars of US policy for decades.

The worst thing that ever happened for human freedom was when those @ssholes in the Middle East discovered oil underneath them. Without it they would still be a bunch of horse-mounted warring tribesmen and their only valuable underground liquid would be water.

I wish our president and congress believed in us enough to call for a boycott on foreign oil, or to implement severe energy-saving policies. Who really feels like it is their constitutional right to drive a Yukon or power three TVs, without having to pay a price? Add the hidden costs of our oil-related presence in the Middle East to the price of gas, and alternative fuels look much more cost-effective.

I will just say that (ahem) I am running SETI@home on my computer right now, and have for years. I'm not sure what Mr. Crichton is getting at with that, but I certainly don't claim there ARE aliens out there--but am open minded to the possibility. We will certainly never know if we don't look, and looking is no easy task (may I recommend Star Flight and Other Improbabilities by Ben Bova).

The nuclear winter scare, as well as a lot of hype about radiation effects stem in part to deliberate propaganda to maximize the deterrent effect of our nuclear arsonal.

As for the other stuff, I'm not an expert on second hand smoke, but I really don't like being around a smoky environment and generally feel like crap afterwards, so I don't really care if it's junk science or not. On the other hand, I tend to avoid smoky places if I don't like them, so it's kind of irrelevant to me. (there was a really good comedian on the Bob and Tom Show who compared this to him not liking Bed, Bath and Beyond, and therefor he avoids it. I believe his name was Auggie Smith.)

As for global warming, I am inclined to believe in the phenomenon, although a lot of FUD has been spewed by both sides which has muddied the water. Al Gore was probably the worst possible self-proclaimed spokesman because it immediately smells of political motives and invokes cynicism.

For the most part, I tend to agree with jmarkdavison, in that it probably is too late to do much about the human contribution to planet warming. There is some evidence of natural cooling/heating cycles anyway. As to human contribution, I don't believe we can reverse it, but I'm certain that we could mitigate the effects. And, while I don't believe it is my 'constitutional right' to drive a Yukon, with my particular hobby, towing power will be necessary when I finally buy that fishing boat. I won't need a Yukon, and my plan is to actually buy a used truck and only use it for that purpose. Hopefully, we can find an alternative power source for my truck AND my boat that doesn't pollute (BioDiesel or Ethanol perhaps?)Also, I do like penguins and polar bears myself, and certainly don't want them to suffer.

My jury is out on SETI, and as far as 'nuclear winter' is concerned, my bet is that very little of humanity would survive MAD anyway.

Secondhand smoke..I try to avoid places where smoking is permitted in an enclosed area not because of fear for health concerns, but rather because I dislike the odor and the odor it leaves on me. When I must go, I shower when I get home and wash my clothing. I don't believe in 'laws' to stop all public smoking like many states and cities have enacted (most recently Harrisburg PA), but then, I lump that into the same category as seatbelts (for adults, not children/infants), or motorcycle helmets. I don't want this to tangent off into the whole insurance debacle either; insurance is enough of a mess and until we get lawmakers with enough chutzpah to stand up to the insurance bullies, the point is rather moot. While I've always worn appropriate safety gear since I became a driver, it should be my right to choose whether or not to wear them. I'm not advocating eliminating seatbelt or helmet laws for kids---they have to be protected from their parents stupidity. Yes, if a parent dies it's traumatic, trust me I know that from experience, but my father didn't die because he didn't wear a seat belt; he had a simple heart attack. I also did get over it, believe it or not I did it without therapy.

At any rate, consensus science should never be used as a policy making tool. Indeed, it needs to be placed in the same category as Snake Oil Salesmen, and just as frowned upon. If a theory doesn't stand on it's own merit, then it should not be used for policy making. Crichton has a valid argument.

This is astonishing, but then again, I am astonished quite often lately. I don;t even care really to respond because so many are completely lost in the reeds.

1. Crichton is not a trained anything, he is a fiction writer, a novelist. Furthermore he DOES NOT Believe that microbes cause disease, but he DOES However think that our psychic state, and possibly trances and demonic possession cause sickness. He also thinks matrix style spoon bending is real. Seriously.

Now before this next bit, I'd like to note, that most of us have no real demonstrable clue what the hell is going on in our carpet, let alone our lungs, brains, upper atmosphere, the economy, cosmos, et cetera. However we all seem to think that by the nature of us HAVING opinions that we are capable of unearthing items of pure incontrovertible truth from out gut and common sense. The latter of which Einstein referred to as "... the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.” This is what is broken with our conversation, we have let selfishness and stupidity stand in for the laws of falsifiability. For Proof, check the argumentative style of Lincoln versus that of O'Reilly (Bill).

To think that global warming is not real is morally corrupt. Not because it violates some group sense of morality towards appreciating our planet at some level, but that it so violates very classical nonos such as Sloth, Idleness, Gluttony, idolatry and the coveting of stuff not yours.

Yes there have been several periods of global warming and cooling in the past. They require a chemical change in the earth's inner composition, oceanic chemistry, atmospheric composition or a change in the relative rotation to the sun, all of which have happened many times in the past...but strangely, none are happening now.

You need a Volcano, Cooling core, meteor, or heavy near earth object to slightly tug us away or towards the sun. Short of that, and the sun's level of radiant energy, it kinda just keeps on keepin on.

Hey there science guys? Whats the new spurious variable? Us...gimme a break.

Furthermore to say that "EVEN if it IS real, its too far gone to do anything about it". Wow, I don;t even know where to start with that. So first, its not real at all, then if there is any chance that it is...then its SUPER BAD. Way to span the divide there. Thats like saying, "I'm not wrong, but if I am, I am as possibly wrong as wrong has the capacity to be. Plus its completely defeatist, and waaaaay ill begot.

By what right to you dismiss yourself from a piece of science, and then STILL feel adequately equipped to discuss possibly solutions??? If you don't think its real, then go back to your tire fire, and we'll name your grand kids in the class action lawsuit to pay for the next 100 years of Super fund sites.

By the way, last time I checked?

Ford and GM are HEMORAGING money, soldiers die quite often for oil, America does not want to depend on this foreign resource anymore, and Bush is caving to Kyoto style standards. You don;t think switching to alternative fuels would probably save the america auto manufacturing market from certain doom? Finally get white folk out of the middle east where we don't belong, and provide a robust reason to invest in this country's technology markets and institutions for decades to come? The world and its problems are bigger than your experience...try to remember that when you wipe your tail end and watch the seconds go by while you contemplate your completely over-evaulated notion of yourself AND your hobbies. I would prefer to NOT live in the time of humans where humans got so greedy and selfish that they destroyed themselves...would be nice to be more, trecky about it.

Second hand smoking? Where there is smoke, there is fire. Your respiratory system is filled with neato little devices, chemicals, organisms and tricks to filter out most any environmental pollution. Even at increased exposure, your body heals. Its almost designed for it. Funny though again the approach. It only seems to matter what you might be able to litigate against. The solution is never to simply not be around smokers, or don't make friends with them. If they insist on smoking near you, and won;t back down, then call the cops and have them cited for being a public nuisance, loitering, disturbing the peace or some other ninny crime that selfish, weak ninnies invent because they so dearly believe that they are so important among all men.

See the book "The Skeptical Environmentalist" by Bjorn Lomborg. He thought that claims that global warming were false were "right wing propaganda". When he investigate the eveidence scientifically and objectively, he arrived at a different conclusion.