Every citizen has a moral obligation to be well informed, then to vote on the basis of that. Of course, there's an intersection between the information and previous prejudices acquired through the skin.
It looks self-defeating if you are capable of taking a long-term view, but I doubt that too many of these people are. After all (to quote Keynes), in the long term, we're dead.
I think you're forgetting that oil is a finite resource (effectively). Once demand exceeds supply (which will happen fairly soon), the price will go through the roof, and _that_ will make the use of carbon-based fuels more expensive than you can imagine. It doesn't need a global warming "agenda" to make this so.
I think Big Tobacco's interest in this would have more to do with a need to discredit science, as in: "See, those damn' scienticians are wrong about global warming, so they're probably lying about smoking causing cancer as well."
As your reference implied, most people are incapable of doing a risk assessment, especially if there's mathematics involved, so tobacco companies just need to obfuscate a bit to make sure their customers ignore the risks.
Just think - at some point, you're going to have to look your grandchildren in the eyes (assuming you have the moral courage, which I doubt) and say, "I'm sorry. I was wrong. I pissed your inheritance away through my willful ignorance and stupidity." They won't forgive you.
Anyone who takes economists seriously has a problem. As a rule, they have no understanding of either mathematics or science. To most economists, the real world is a special case.
I don't think you understand what "having a financial interest" in something means, either.
All _I_ want to know is does this new chemical float you on the same lovely pink cloud of "I don't give a shit" as proper opiates, preferably without acquiring a savage addiction. (God, I love opiates. I'm not addicted. Really. But I might be if they were easily and legally available. They're just soooo nice if you have a broken wrist.)
Slashdot Mirror
This is actually what the whole "angels dancing on the head of a pin" thing was about.
It's a bug, not a feature.
Sounds a lot like the Time Cube to me ...
Honestly, it's like Cantor never existed.
It's far more likely they didn't _care_ about the consequences.
Every citizen has a moral obligation to be well informed, then to vote on the basis of that. Of course, there's an intersection between the information and previous prejudices acquired through the skin.
dave@fuck-off-and-die.com
Actuelly, I think we'll stop using cars fairly soon, as the price of crude will make a car-based society unsustainable in the not-too-distant future.
Outstanding! Another old fart, I'd guess.
You could even make out a pretty good case for post-natal abortion.
It looks self-defeating if you are capable of taking a long-term view, but I doubt that too many of these people are. After all (to quote Keynes), in the long term, we're dead.
On the other hand, the spit is pretty gross.
I think you're forgetting that oil is a finite resource (effectively). Once demand exceeds supply (which will happen fairly soon), the price will go through the roof, and _that_ will make the use of carbon-based fuels more expensive than you can imagine. It doesn't need a global warming "agenda" to make this so.
"Right-wing common sense" is an oxymoron.
I think Big Tobacco's interest in this would have more to do with a need to discredit science, as in: "See, those damn' scienticians are wrong about global warming, so they're probably lying about smoking causing cancer as well."
As your reference implied, most people are incapable of doing a risk assessment, especially if there's mathematics involved, so tobacco companies just need to obfuscate a bit to make sure their customers ignore the risks.
It was more to do with Randolph Hearst's investment in trees (to make paper from woodpulp rather than hemp fibre). But yeah, bought legislation.
It sounds like they've re-implemented a CODASYL database as a data type within a relational database - braindead.
All he needed was a 4000 Amp slo-blo fuse (4" nail) ...
Just think - at some point, you're going to have to look your grandchildren in the eyes (assuming you have the moral courage, which I doubt) and say, "I'm sorry. I was wrong. I pissed your inheritance away through my willful ignorance and stupidity." They won't forgive you.
Anyone who takes economists seriously has a problem. As a rule, they have no understanding of either mathematics or science. To most economists, the real world is a special case.
I don't think you understand what "having a financial interest" in something means, either.
It has a bit to do with his dad's sense of style.
I got quite excited about your sig, until I realised it said _paid_.
Intergraph pulled the same trick with coordinates (large scaled integers) in their CAD software.
All _I_ want to know is does this new chemical float you on the same lovely pink cloud of "I don't give a shit" as proper opiates, preferably without acquiring a savage addiction. (God, I love opiates. I'm not addicted. Really. But I might be if they were easily and legally available. They're just soooo nice if you have a broken wrist.)
Whatever. I was trying to irritate the parent poster rather than accurately describe the descent of man.
Ah. I see you share your house with a cat.