The nice thing about this country is that people of good will can view the exact same issue through different lenses and come to totally different conclusions. I guess that happens everywhere, but the good thing about THIS country is that we can agree to disagree with out becoming disagreeable (: . Take my postings on various issues of current politics,religion or ecology. My views are drawn from my own experiences and by weighing and considering the facts as I find them. My conclusions are thus (as far as I can tell) supported by some factual base of information. Readers that have opposing views believe that their positions are equally supported by facts. We disagree on the facts.
Take climate issues for example. I support the view that man is the major contributor to the global climate changes now underway. My views are drawn from years of experience observing the earth as a single ecosystem, and by reviewing much of the science associated with it. My view is supported by the international scientific community and most of the governments of the world. The opposing view posits that man is not the prime cause of the observed changes and that these are merely natural cycles. That view is supported by a tiny minority of scientists with alternate schemes, the energy industries of the world, the manufacturing giants of the world, North Korea and Rush Limbaugh. See anything amiss here?
No one disagrees that there are changes afoot. Only what is causing them and what can reduce them. Naturally I think I am correct, and the others think they are correct. They are not. They say I am not. That is the essence of disagreement.
I believe that the changes underway have moved past a tipping point and will go to some end point in the future with disastrous consequences. The other side of this issue says not. They are wrong.
But as has been said before by someone “Time will Tell”. The pity is that I probably won’t be around to say “I Told You So”.
Image: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mechanics/imgmech/topp.gif
Take climate issues for example. I support the view that man is the major contributor to the global climate changes now underway. My views are drawn from years of experience observing the earth as a single ecosystem, and by reviewing much of the science associated with it. My view is supported by the international scientific community and most of the governments of the world. The opposing view posits that man is not the prime cause of the observed changes and that these are merely natural cycles. That view is supported by a tiny minority of scientists with alternate schemes, the energy industries of the world, the manufacturing giants of the world, North Korea and Rush Limbaugh. See anything amiss here?
No one disagrees that there are changes afoot. Only what is causing them and what can reduce them. Naturally I think I am correct, and the others think they are correct. They are not. They say I am not. That is the essence of disagreement.
I believe that the changes underway have moved past a tipping point and will go to some end point in the future with disastrous consequences. The other side of this issue says not. They are wrong.
But as has been said before by someone “Time will Tell”. The pity is that I probably won’t be around to say “I Told You So”.
Image: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mechanics/imgmech/topp.gif
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment