Air pollution - is it really all we have to worry about and not Global Warming

[Greatcloud]

I still think GW is not relevent today except to help stop air polution in large city's from cars and factories.

 

[sfs]

I still think GW is not relevent today except to help stop air polution in large city's from cars and factories.

Scientists think otherwise. But don't let reality get in the way of your preconceived ideas.

 

[Loudmouth]

I still think GW is not relevent today except to help stop air polution in large city's from cars and factories.

Cardinal Bellarmine didn't think that Galileo's ideas of Heliocentrism were relevant to the motion of the Earth, Sun, and planets.

 

[juvenissun]

Scientists think otherwise. But don't let reality get in the way of your preconceived ideas.

Scientists can prove whatever they want. The result goes nowhere except a few journals that nobody else will take it seriously.

 

[sfs]

Scientists can prove whatever they want. The result goes nowhere except a few journals that nobody else will take it seriously.

Here's the funny thing about reality: it doesn't matter whether anybody takes it seriously or not. It's still there. There is no end to the people who prefer to ignore reality in favor of their cherished beliefs -- but what did Jesus say about the broad way?

 

[juvenissun]

Here's the funny thing about reality: it doesn't matter whether anybody takes it seriously or not. It's still there. There is no end to the people who prefer to ignore reality in favor of their cherished beliefs -- but what did Jesus say about the broad way?

Science information is misused by many people in many ways. Yes, the natural reality is still there, only the human society/history is changed by those misuses.

As a scientist, what can you do, except cranking up a few more articles for further misuse?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Science information is misused by many people in many ways. Yes, the natural reality is still there, only the human society/history is changed by those misuses.

As a scientist, what can you do, except cranking up a few more articles for further misuse?

No one intends this knowledge to be misused.

 

[juvenissun]

No one intends this knowledge to be misused.

You do not misuse it when you can not.
When you can, you WILL misuse it.

 

[lesliedellow]

I still think GW is not relevent today except to help stop air polution in large city's from cars and factories.

I wonder if your grandchildren will agree, when they go paddling in the streets of New York? It is no matter of opinion that great lumps are falling of of the Greenland and Antartica ice sheets.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

No one intends this knowledge to be misused.

Knowledge unused is knowledge misused.

 

[sfs]

Science information is misused by many people in many ways. Yes, the natural reality is still there, only the human society/history is changed by those misuses.

As a scientist, what can you do, except cranking up a few more articles for further misuse?

No doubt you're correct. It's certainly true that smallpox and polio are still rampant, transportation and communication are both limited to the speed of a horse, and computers don't exist. Right?

 

[selfinflikted]

I still think GW is not relevent today except to help stop air polution in large city's from cars and factories.

What makes you think GW is not relevant?

 

[Loudmouth]

Science information is misused by many people in many ways.

How do you determine if scientific information is being misused?

 

[juvenissun]

How do you determine if scientific information is being misused?

mis-interpreted.

 

[juvenissun]

No doubt you're correct. It's certainly true that smallpox and polio are still rampant, transportation and communication are both limited to the speed of a horse, and computers don't exist. Right?

Well, engineers make products and will be used for some substantial purposes. Scientists who study the nature rarely make any product. All they make are data and academic interpretations and implications. Non-scientists (mostly, politicians) do not care a bit about the data. But they will quote your interpretation/implication (not certain at the first place) and use it out of the context.

What the poor scientist can do? Not a thing.

 

[Loudmouth]

mis-interpreted.

How do you determine if scientific information has been mis-interpreted?

 

[Loudmouth]

Well, engineers make products and will be used for some substantial purposes. Scientists who study the nature rarely make any product. All they make are data and academic interpretations and implications. Non-scientists (mostly, politicians) do not care a bit about the data. But they will quote your interpretation/implication (not certain at the first place) and use it out of the context.

What the poor scientist can do? Not a thing.

Engineers make products based on the knowledged discovered by scientists doing basic research.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Well, engineers make products and will be used for some substantial purposes. Scientists who study the nature rarely make any product. All they make are data and academic interpretations and implications. Non-scientists (mostly, politicians) do not care a bit about the data. But they will quote your interpretation/implication (not certain at the first place) and use it out of the context.

What the poor scientist can do? Not a thing.

What exactly do you want scientists to do? They couldn't possibly control how people use their information once they make it public.

 

[sfs]

Well, engineers make products and will be used for some substantial purposes. Scientists who study the nature rarely make any product. All they make are data and academic interpretations and implications. Non-scientists (mostly, politicians) do not care a bit about the data. But they will quote your interpretation/implication (not certain at the first place) and use it out of the context.

What the poor scientist can do? Not a thing.

Engineers don't make products either; they design them and manufacturers make them. Quite often, they design them using information gained from scientists. So scientists have, in fact, had an immense (if indirect) effect on everyday life. It's only in selected areas of science, mostly ones where public opinion has been shaped by ideology, that scientific information is routinely ignored.

In any case, why the sudden concern for "poor scientists"?

 

[Nithavela]

Ah yes, the poor scientists. Only sciencing in their ivory towers, throwing out papers and data without any relevance and effect on the real world! Let's open a can of pity for them.