Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >>   - 'global warming' is perhaps the only thing mentioned that comes
> >> close to being a controversy in the scientific field.
> >
> > And even then it's not that controversial.  It's a relatively small
> > percentage of scientists who study climate change who think climate
> > change isn't happening.

> I think it's more controversial what to do about it.  And at least there's 
> something that remotely *sounds* controversial about it, if you actually 
> read the original source stuff.

  I would even go so far as to say that the controversial thing is not
what to do about it, but that many people actually oppose the rational
thing to do. "We should stop polluting our environment and depleting
natural resources." I don't even understand what rational reason there
is to oppose that idea. Is reducing pollution somehow a bad thing? Even
if there was no climate change and everything was just and absolutely
fine, we should *still* reduce pollution.

  Pollution causes harm to humans. That's a fact. The only controversial
thing in this whole thing is the people who want to continue polluting
the environment.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message