Scoble and Politics
I want smart readers. The fact that you think global warming is something that we can ignore means you shouldn’t read me. Go somewhere else. Even George Bush now acknowledges that global warming is real and is something we need to do about. Thanks.
I don’t know Robert Scoble. He seems like a nice enough guy, and I enjoy scanning his site for tech news, but his recent foray into the world of politics is a bit of a turn off — especially when it is presented with a Bay Area attitude of omniscient supremacy. “Don’t read my tech blog if you don’t agree with my political views” is a poor attitude to have.
And yes, climate change, as presented by Scoble (asking what Microsoft is going to do about it) is a political issue. There’s science to be discussed regarding climate change, but most of the discussion is politically-motivated “wag the dog” blather.
Out of curiousity, what do you think of this item from junkscience.com”?
I’m starting to actually think that global warming might be real. Honestly, I’m totally convinced one way or the other. The weather has been really erratic over the past couple of years, but I doubt that human beings have alot to do with it. But if we do, than countries like China and India are to blame, not the US or most of the western world for that matter.
“Honestly, I’m totally convinced one way or the other.”
No, I don’t have a bad case of John Kerry-itis. I meant to write, “Honestly, I’m not totally convinced one way or the other.” Sorry.
Denying global climate change is fast entering the realm of “the CIA killed JFK,” “the moon landing was done on a sound stage” or — I must add — “AIDS doesn’t exist.” Can I prove that the CIA did not kill JFK? No, I cannot possibly do that. Do I have any evidence that the moon landing really happened? Certainly not — that’s far beyond my knowledge. Likewise, I cannot prove that China exists (having never been there), that FDR ever existed (being too young), or that the stratosphere actually extends 50km above Earth’s surface (lacking any way to get that high). But given the overwhelming consensus of experts in each of these fields and my desire not to be perceived as a crank, I choose to either believe the consensus or, if not, keep quiet about it.
Denying global climate change is not there quite yet, but give it 12-36 months.
There’s not an overwhelming consensus among experts that climate change is significant or caused by humans. Those are just the people who sell the most books and get the most TV appearances. It’s the same as with terrorism. The people who say “really, in the grand scheme of things, it’s not that big of a deal” don’t get put on Oprah or Fox News. They’re far too boring. All science and no jazz. People and governments pay attention when you claim that your pet problem is going to destroy civilization. If you object, well, you’re a bad guy because you (a) don’t care about the earth (b) want the terrorists to win.
Now just to be clear, I’m not saying that the earth hasn’t warmed in the last 100 years. I’m just saying that I’m not overwhelmed by the people who say this fluctuation is significant or the people who say human behavior is to blame. The earth has been warming and cooling for billions of years before we were here, and the earth’s CO2 concentrations have been fluctuating for billions of years before we were here. It’s natural for these things to swing back and forth. I think we overestimate our influence.
If advocates of catastrophic global warming are correct, in 36 months it’ll be impossible to deny. The significance of the warming, that is — the question of human blame will probably have to wait a good 10,000 years (and by that time we may be in an ice age again, dreaming of the comfortable and fertile days of global thawing). Or, they’ll just move the goalposts. Predictions that don’t cash in for 50 years are the best, as the predictors will have died of more efficient killers than terrorism and climate change by the time judgment day rolls around.
[...] Bush to Nominate Khalilzad as United Nations Ambassador foxnews.com Found 21 days ago The White House confirms that President Bush will nominate Zalmay Khalilzad to be United U.S. envoy to the United Nations and Ryan Crocker to replace him as U.S. ambassador to Iraq. [...]
I’ve got to agree with your Scoble comment. I’ve found that he’s quick to anger, slow to factcheck, but willing to correct mistakes if you call him up. It’s a mixed bag when someone so opinionated is popularly read. The whole, “with power comes…” thing.
But that is everyday Scoble. The Scobelizer thrives on telling people not to read his blog, knowing full well that will entice them to read his blog…..
Of course, that is why I keep going back…. lol
Boy would I be happy if I could quicktags to work on my site (this is just an aside….
)
Robert Scoble mentions George Bush words about it, but I think it is lie. He is telling a lot, but don’t do anything about it.
Global warming is a critical issue, it shouldn’t be connected with politics.