Exactly. For me there is no climate change issue yet. Just a bunch of people arguing about who's right.
I know it doesn't matter who wins, climate change or retarded self protectionists; or chrisitans vs other christians; or Israelis or Palestinians. Getting _into_ the fight is a lose situation!
If I find some evolutionary winners, that are adaptable and energy (ie cost) cheap to impliment. Then there's a good chance that's the correct decision to start with, and being cheaper can be acted on. Once that's being implemented then one can measure the effects and test the causes of those effects. Because until the cost vs benefit of effect is known and tested for -each- instance of application, then the science is still lab theory, and everything is still going to hell in either direction.
I find education quite a poor tool BTW. I know many highly educated people, yet for all their education they become extremely specialised and seem to have poor adaption qualities. They often seem to flourish within a stratified and artifical environment, yet when face with real world forces seldom seem to impliment what they've been taught. It's not that the education is bad...just evolutionarily expensive, and as resources are forced tighter (by population) then they are not so useful/adaptable. This is further linked in some way to the way that certain topics become socially taboo - like the fact that most of the issue is related to population density and size, but like genetics and race, it's a very hot potato. The final result being a constant supply of patches for the symptom, a seldom a solution for the issue which is the same type of operation the pharmaceutical companies have. Why sell cures, when symptom relief is so much more profitable!
The beauty of the agnostic position is it requires no investment, it is evolutionarily cheap. Not that "reality of god can't be known" but "gods existance is gods problem" leaving the entity to ponder theirm own existance and how to express it. The latter being a far more useful and functional process, and one which amusingly enough leads to the eventual proofs that god does exist. Which is similiar to the climate issue. It doesn't matter if there's a problem, it matters about the size of effect/impact our individual efforts have. If we can control those effectively (and cheapily/competitively) then the bigger problem is not much of a outside threat. If we can't control them effectively then we have a bigger and more immediate problem on our hands than climate change! Although debating about climate change and truths will mask that symptom.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2010-01-30 09:42 pm (UTC)For me there is no climate change issue yet. Just a bunch of people arguing about who's right.
I know it doesn't matter who wins, climate change or retarded self protectionists; or chrisitans vs other christians; or Israelis or Palestinians. Getting _into_ the fight is a lose situation!
If I find some evolutionary winners, that are adaptable and energy (ie cost) cheap to impliment. Then there's a good chance that's the correct decision to start with, and being cheaper can be acted on.
Once that's being implemented then one can measure the effects and test the causes of those effects. Because until the cost vs benefit of effect is known and tested for -each- instance of application, then the science is still lab theory, and everything is still going to hell in either direction.
I find education quite a poor tool BTW. I know many highly educated people, yet for all their education they become extremely specialised and seem to have poor adaption qualities. They often seem to flourish within a stratified and artifical environment, yet when face with real world forces seldom seem to impliment what they've been taught. It's not that the education is bad...just evolutionarily expensive, and as resources are forced tighter (by population) then they are not so useful/adaptable. This is further linked in some way to the way that certain topics become socially taboo - like the fact that most of the issue is related to population density and size, but like genetics and race, it's a very hot potato. The final result being a constant supply of patches for the symptom, a seldom a solution for the issue which is the same type of operation the pharmaceutical companies have. Why sell cures, when symptom relief is so much more profitable!
The beauty of the agnostic position is it requires no investment, it is evolutionarily cheap. Not that "reality of god can't be known" but "gods existance is gods problem" leaving the entity to ponder theirm own existance and how to express it. The latter being a far more useful and functional process, and one which amusingly enough leads to the eventual proofs that god does exist.
Which is similiar to the climate issue. It doesn't matter if there's a problem, it matters about the size of effect/impact our individual efforts have. If we can control those effectively (and cheapily/competitively) then the bigger problem is not much of a outside threat. If we can't control them effectively then we have a bigger and more immediate problem on our hands than climate change! Although debating about climate change and truths will mask that symptom.