RE: MD Beyond

From: Platt Holden (
Date: Sun Mar 14 2004 - 20:08:28 GMT

  • Next message: Wim Nusselder: "Re: MD quality religion"

    DMB and All:

    l> dmb says:
    > As usual, Platt has presented an "argument" that is without merit both
    > factually and logicallly.

    Au contraire. Consider the following:

    "Alarmists Exaggerate Pentagon Climate Report - Global Warming
    Speculations Misrepresented as Fact
    by Competitive Enterprise Institute Staff

    "Washington, D.C., February 24, 2004—A recent report on the possible
    future effects of global warming, issued by two researchers working for
    the U.S. Department of Defense, is being unfortunately misinterpreted as a
    prediction of imminent climatic disaster. The report, prepared last
    October, considers a series of far-ranging scenarios based on an array of
    models and hypotheses of varying degrees of likelihood. The authors
    repeatedly emphasize the conditional nature of the report, referring to
    their predictions as “extreme” and “not the most likely.”

    “'Some alarmists are pointing to the Pentagon report as proof that we face
    impending climate disaster, but even a brief review shows that that isn’t
    the case,' said Myron Ebell, Director of Global Warming and International
    Environmental Policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. 'As with
    past national security assessments, the Department of Defense was
    presented with a worst case scenario, not the likely future. The Pentagon
    naturally believes it has to research any possible threat – whether it be
    an alien invasion, an accidental nuclear detonation, or catastrophic
    climate change.'”

    "The report, titled An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications
    for United States National Security, does make a useful contribution to
    the global warming debate, however, by recommending the “immediate action”
    of improving predictive climate models. The authors also decline to
    endorse the energy suppression agenda of the Kyoto Protocol and similar
    measures which would make the world poorer without providing any
    discernible impact on the climate."

    As I've said before, unless we can show Pirsig's position on the
    environmental debate relative to the MOQ, this is not the place to duke it
    out. Hard to resist, though, especially when a thread contribution is so
    radically unbalanced.



    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Mar 14 2004 - 20:11:53 GMT