Savage Rabbit wrote: So either we stuff a sock in the business lobbys mouth and make some relatively elementary changes to make energy consumption more efficient and industury and society more enviromentally friendly."
Relatively minor changes? Not by a longshot. The so-called Global Warming issue is at best a billion dollar problem that its supporters want a Trillion dollar solution for. Capping Carbon Dioxide emmissions at 1990 levels will ruin, RUIN the Western economies.
All for a problem that may or may not exist. Lets get the science down first before all the predictions of environmental armageddon.
Remember the 70's? The coming Ice Age was a pre-occupation then. Time will tell, but I believe that Global Warming (these days it's "Enhanced Greenhouse effect becuase the models and empircal data ro date do adequately support Gobal Warming), is just a fad.
Oh, so let me get this straight. We should start paying artificially high prices for our energy costing TRILLIONS of dollars in direct costs, lost economic growth etc., for a problem that is based on shoddy science?
Get real.
Who says the temp is rising faster in the last 200 years than anything we have seen since the last ice age?
I wish people would stop repeating the doom and gloom diatribe of environmentalists. They and their scientific supporters are mouthpieces for anti-development, anti-free market idealogues. There is no reliable data available to support the statement that temperatures have risen rapidly over the last 200 years.
Enough already with the statements about Global Warming - the science is unproven and politically charged.
Before we keep repeating it to ourselves over and over, lets be sure that the science is sound. The so called scientific reports from the IPCC are not peer reviewed and are unreliable.
In the meantime - keep drilling for the black stuff!
An insurance company is wrong in using genetic screening without an applicant's knowledge (even though they likely signed a waiver giving the insurance company the right to do it). With the exception of the situation outlined below:
Suppose an individual has his DNA genetically screened and it is determined that that person has a significant chance of getting any of a number of fatal conditions or diseases because of genetic flaws, and then that person starts applying for life insurance because he's scared that he will die younger than he otherwise would.
The situation described above is called in insurance jargon - antiselection. Insurance companies spend a lot of time and money guarding against antiselection because it increases underwriting risks beyond expectations and cuts into profitability.
So forget about all this Gattaca "Brave New World" hyperbole and think about this: All an insurance company should have the right to know is what you know about yourself.
The main reason for buying insurance is not to hit the jackpot but to protect you, your Estate or family from unexpected circumstances.
And yes, I used to work for an insurance company - but then I grew a brain.
Slashdot Mirror
Because it is in our genes.
Savage Rabbit wrote: So either we stuff a sock in the business lobbys mouth and make some relatively elementary changes to make energy consumption more efficient and industury and society more enviromentally friendly." Relatively minor changes? Not by a longshot. The so-called Global Warming issue is at best a billion dollar problem that its supporters want a Trillion dollar solution for. Capping Carbon Dioxide emmissions at 1990 levels will ruin, RUIN the Western economies. All for a problem that may or may not exist. Lets get the science down first before all the predictions of environmental armageddon. Remember the 70's? The coming Ice Age was a pre-occupation then. Time will tell, but I believe that Global Warming (these days it's "Enhanced Greenhouse effect becuase the models and empircal data ro date do adequately support Gobal Warming), is just a fad.
Oh, so let me get this straight. We should start paying artificially high prices for our energy costing TRILLIONS of dollars in direct costs, lost economic growth etc., for a problem that is based on shoddy science? Get real.
Who says the temp is rising faster in the last 200 years than anything we have seen since the last ice age? I wish people would stop repeating the doom and gloom diatribe of environmentalists. They and their scientific supporters are mouthpieces for anti-development, anti-free market idealogues. There is no reliable data available to support the statement that temperatures have risen rapidly over the last 200 years.
Enough already with the statements about Global Warming - the science is unproven and politically charged. Before we keep repeating it to ourselves over and over, lets be sure that the science is sound. The so called scientific reports from the IPCC are not peer reviewed and are unreliable. In the meantime - keep drilling for the black stuff!
An insurance company is wrong in using genetic screening without an applicant's knowledge (even though they likely signed a waiver giving the insurance company the right to do it). With the exception of the situation outlined below: Suppose an individual has his DNA genetically screened and it is determined that that person has a significant chance of getting any of a number of fatal conditions or diseases because of genetic flaws, and then that person starts applying for life insurance because he's scared that he will die younger than he otherwise would. The situation described above is called in insurance jargon - antiselection. Insurance companies spend a lot of time and money guarding against antiselection because it increases underwriting risks beyond expectations and cuts into profitability. So forget about all this Gattaca "Brave New World" hyperbole and think about this: All an insurance company should have the right to know is what you know about yourself. The main reason for buying insurance is not to hit the jackpot but to protect you, your Estate or family from unexpected circumstances. And yes, I used to work for an insurance company - but then I grew a brain.