Comments on: Why ‘science’ alone isn’t enough for setting environmental policy http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/10/02/why-science-alone-isnt-enough-for-setting-environmental-policy/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: brotherkenny4 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/10/02/why-science-alone-isnt-enough-for-setting-environmental-policy/#comment-1107819 Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:31:06 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=43882#comment-1107819 Okay, let’s try again. Science is a reasoned method for testing hypothesis’. Humans are mostly not scientists or scientific. Science, or more specifically scientific consensus is not always reached. However, to deny the science which has reached consensus is to be in conflict with reality. To say that because there is some doubt (usually supported by someone in the scientific community who also has financial allegiances to the industry they protect) when a small minority of people do not agree with the consensus is evidence of the non-consensus point is to pervert the scientific process. The corporations and their political minions in both the DFL and GOP pervert the scientific process in hopes of fooling the mostly non-scientific populace.

There is no evidence that our leaders have the kind of humanity necessary to determine the path forward with regard to information gained by scientific endeavor. They consistently worry about the corporations and generally use the jobs scare tactic as if the existence of the corporations is necessary for our existence and happiness. It is just a lie that many fools fall for.

]]>
By: brotherkenny4 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/10/02/why-science-alone-isnt-enough-for-setting-environmental-policy/#comment-1107818 Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:14:16 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=43882#comment-1107818 Are you still suppressing the speech that get at the heart of this fallacy?

]]>
By: Reiser http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/10/02/why-science-alone-isnt-enough-for-setting-environmental-policy/#comment-1107029 Fri, 02 Oct 2015 17:03:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=43882#comment-1107029 Had to check the URL and make sure I hadn’t accidentally loaded the Fox News website… surprised to see such anti-intellectual garbage on Reuters.

]]>
By: Solidar http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/10/02/why-science-alone-isnt-enough-for-setting-environmental-policy/#comment-1107004 Fri, 02 Oct 2015 15:50:47 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=43882#comment-1107004 Haha. George W. Bush’s “Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.” This writer is the Baghdad Bob of pollution.

“What problem? We are victorious. We have the smog on the run.”

]]>
By: UauS http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/10/02/why-science-alone-isnt-enough-for-setting-environmental-policy/#comment-1106992 Fri, 02 Oct 2015 15:27:34 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=43882#comment-1106992 We need to understand some things that are not rocket science at all… First, that we are ALL in the same boat, called the Earth. Second, if we continue living like there’s no tomorrow, so why have children? Third, that NO ONE can wear ten pants on the same butt, and that obesity, hunger and the environment are a few components of the same problem: ignorance, arrogance and greed.
In order to survive, we need to change our inner environment first.

]]>
By: Mottjr http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/10/02/why-science-alone-isnt-enough-for-setting-environmental-policy/#comment-1106981 Fri, 02 Oct 2015 14:42:35 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=43882#comment-1106981 Science vs. FUD? The choice is clear to be former in the rational minds.

“.. Communities .. sacrifice .. deserve better..” – author’s conclusion on behalf of the communities is seen as self-serving as the reality of current-day communities and their conscious choices were clearly seen to be in favor of sustainability of future of current and next generation.

]]>
By: CanyonLiveOak http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/10/02/why-science-alone-isnt-enough-for-setting-environmental-policy/#comment-1106959 Fri, 02 Oct 2015 13:11:43 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=43882#comment-1106959 When I read the title of the article, I was so hopeful that someone had finally come around to the notion reasoning alone will not solve a problem or change people’s behavior, but that we must in addition equal amounts of empathy and heart for the vibrant earth that we are part of. This world is such a magical place that surely the heart of an artist must be coupled to the mind of a scientist to make decisions and solve problems in a meaningful way.

How sad I was to see the author take such a limited focus on such an important topic. There is more to life than science, politics, and economics.

]]>