Forum
  Classifieds
  News
  Localband
  Shows
  Show Pics
  Polls

  OT Threads
  Other News
  Movies
  VideoGames
  Videos
  TV
  Sports
  Gear
  /r/
  Food

  New Thread
  New Poll

E-mail

New site? Maybe some day.

Username:

SPAM Filter: re-type this

(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)

Message:

UBB enabled. HTML disabled Spam Filtering enabledIcons: (click image to insert) Show All - pop

b i u add: url image video(?)

:	post by ShadowSD at 2006-07-02 14:54:35

ManoftheCentury said:

Business is out for the profit. It always has been. But the thing that people forget is any good business man would not try to ruin the planet and its people. If that happens, who's going to purchase thier product. Thats not to saythat it never happens, it just doesn't always happen.

Scientist should be loyal to fact. I say should, because they are human and can be convinced otherwise.

You said "no business man would" try to ruin the planet, but then said "scientists should be loyal to fact". Although you go on to mention exceptions to both rules, the business man's good intentions are espoused before they are brought into question, while the scientist's intentions are impliclity questioned from the get go. That suggests more of an implicit faith in the business side. Just an observation.

The point is though that the money in big business makes people greedy, and greed makes people shortsighted. Science, on the other hand, is responsible for our very understanding of time and the ability to predict long term patterns. When deciding who to trust regarding a scientific phenomena that is happening over time, it's not an even split.

ManoftheCentury said:

You have both groups filling out into both science and profit. Which is why any time I hear about something (like global warming) I lookat both sides first. Then I validate the facts on both sides using neutral forms of information. I then make a choice on my own, just like I did here.

Which is definitely the right way to go.

ManoftheCentury said:

Nope, I was trying to say that the earth has the means to fix itself of the holes. CFCs take on average of 10-15 years to hit the o-zone layer. They were phased out of production in 1994. That means even though there are no more CFCs being pumped into the atmosphere, there still floating up there. Around 2009-2010 you should start seeing a reduction in the hole that stays. People just have to give it time.

Alright, but if my head catches fire in 2010, I'm holding you responsible.