Hi Mike.
I see. Squashing the information gathered by the IPCC and Al Gore is fine but not you favorites George Bush and the oil lobby, now I understand the rouls in this messabe board
Mike,
If you have been actively “Squashing†information that was diligently
gathered by the IPCC and AL Gore.
For everything else, there's [your credit card of choice] ;)
I do disagree with that sentiment however. No one may be able to name the price of the head of a dead cat, but the same is true for an infinite amount of possible objects - and they aren't all collectively the most valuable things in the world.
In terms of databases, they are like NULL - nothing is true or untrue about it. The head of a dead cat is neither the most valuable object in the world nor is it -not- the most valuable thing in the world - the determination can only be made once a value is assigned to it.
The question itself may be objectively unanswerable for lack of data - subjectively, it may be unanswerable because 'value' is something that depends on consensus. Further, without humans the very concept has no meaning. (much like the concepts of good and evil - purely subjective concepts that have no meaning without humans to define them, but since there are humans it doesn't make sense to deny their existence)
That's the crux of the problem.. There is difference between something having intrinsic value and monetary value. I hold more valuable the love of my children then I do a 1.6 million dollar painting. Really what is value but a clinging. And things without a value produce no clinging therefore they are the most valuable things in the world
There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot. - Aldo Leopold
Following your logic I'd say they're the -least- valuable things in the world. (which, oddly would make sense if you look at the word: value-able; if something can't be valued then it isn't valuable by definition :P)
But maybe I'm not reading your post right ... (is all this really on-topic?)
Tomas, apology accepted! You're a good man for saying so. On my part I can get too didactic sometimes .... :-)
I understand the passion. It makes perfect sense. Why crap in the only nest we have? We have this jewel to live on, in the middle of this vast cosmos. It is invaluable in the truest sense. At best only a dozen of us have made it to a nearby rock, and then only briefly. Even if Alpha Centauri had planets with perfect conditions for humans, we have no serious hope of reaching it. It is insane to continue to behave, as a group, in the manner that we have.
It's not the aim of environmental movements that I have have trouble with, it's their process. They have to do a lot better in engaging the general body of mankind or they will fail. There in lies the deeper tragedy and risk.
We need, say, another Rachel Carson who did all the hard yards ( connecting insecticide use to bird eggshell failure ) and presented it beautifully and cleanly. Alas GW doesn't lend itself to a similiarly simple explanation, but we ought not despair. Even the basic distinction between 'weather' and 'climate' ( time scale of trend ) hasn't penetrated much.
We have the perpetual issue of public participants pretending to be something they are not for personal gain or subversion of agenda ( sorry, but Mr Gore is such an exact example of this ). This dilutes and confounds the thrust of the good messages.
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Following your logic I'd say they're the -least- valuable things in the world. (which, oddly would make sense if you look at the word: value-able; if something can't be valued then it isn't valuable by definition :P)
But maybe I'm not reading your post right ... (is all this really on-topic?)
I apologize I am just trying to be a smart ass..:-)
Why I think its relevant, is that ideas, opinions and 'theories' hold intrinsic value to individuals (beings).
Anything that holds value to an individual causes clinging. An individual who clings is not free. Every individual(being) should have an opportunity to be free.:-)
There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot. - Aldo Leopold
RE: Hi Mike. I see.
Mike,
If you have been actively “Squashing†information that was diligently
gathered by the IPCC and AL Gore.
I DEMAND that it be released Forthwith !!!
I think I speak for us all :-)
Regards
Bill
Have a nice summer\winter
Have a nice summer\winter guy's depending on the side of the equator :)
Tomas
RE: Have a nice
Thank You Tomas.
I wish I lived in Konungariket Sverige__ for two reasons.
1. The United States is Rapidly sinking into the Abyss.
2. I am a big ABBA fan :-)
Take Care,
Bill
Hi Mike! I was too brusque
Hi Mike!
I was too brusque with you and I apologize. It's just that I'm
kind of wild at hart when it comes to GW and in this case i do not mean Gravity waves. :)
Sozan, a Chinese Zen master,
Sozan, a Chinese Zen master, was asked by a student: "What is the most valuable thing in the world?"
The master replied: "The head of a dead cat."
"Why is the head of a dead cat the most valuable thing in the world?" inquired the student.
Sozan replied: "Because no one can name its price."
There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot. - Aldo Leopold
For everything else, there's
For everything else, there's [your credit card of choice] ;)
I do disagree with that sentiment however. No one may be able to name the price of the head of a dead cat, but the same is true for an infinite amount of possible objects - and they aren't all collectively the most valuable things in the world.
In terms of databases, they are like NULL - nothing is true or untrue about it. The head of a dead cat is neither the most valuable object in the world nor is it -not- the most valuable thing in the world - the determination can only be made once a value is assigned to it.
The question itself may be objectively unanswerable for lack of data - subjectively, it may be unanswerable because 'value' is something that depends on consensus. Further, without humans the very concept has no meaning. (much like the concepts of good and evil - purely subjective concepts that have no meaning without humans to define them, but since there are humans it doesn't make sense to deny their existence)
That's the crux of the
That's the crux of the problem.. There is difference between something having intrinsic value and monetary value. I hold more valuable the love of my children then I do a 1.6 million dollar painting. Really what is value but a clinging. And things without a value produce no clinging therefore they are the most valuable things in the world
There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot. - Aldo Leopold
Following your logic I'd say
Following your logic I'd say they're the -least- valuable things in the world. (which, oddly would make sense if you look at the word: value-able; if something can't be valued then it isn't valuable by definition :P)
But maybe I'm not reading your post right ... (is all this really on-topic?)
Tomas, apology accepted!
Tomas, apology accepted! You're a good man for saying so. On my part I can get too didactic sometimes .... :-)
I understand the passion. It makes perfect sense. Why crap in the only nest we have? We have this jewel to live on, in the middle of this vast cosmos. It is invaluable in the truest sense. At best only a dozen of us have made it to a nearby rock, and then only briefly. Even if Alpha Centauri had planets with perfect conditions for humans, we have no serious hope of reaching it. It is insane to continue to behave, as a group, in the manner that we have.
It's not the aim of environmental movements that I have have trouble with, it's their process. They have to do a lot better in engaging the general body of mankind or they will fail. There in lies the deeper tragedy and risk.
We need, say, another Rachel Carson who did all the hard yards ( connecting insecticide use to bird eggshell failure ) and presented it beautifully and cleanly. Alas GW doesn't lend itself to a similiarly simple explanation, but we ought not despair. Even the basic distinction between 'weather' and 'climate' ( time scale of trend ) hasn't penetrated much.
We have the perpetual issue of public participants pretending to be something they are not for personal gain or subversion of agenda ( sorry, but Mr Gore is such an exact example of this ). This dilutes and confounds the thrust of the good messages.
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
RE: Following your logic
I apologize I am just trying to be a smart ass..:-)
Why I think its relevant, is that ideas, opinions and 'theories' hold intrinsic value to individuals (beings).
Anything that holds value to an individual causes clinging. An individual who clings is not free. Every individual(being) should have an opportunity to be free.:-)
There are some who can live without wild things and some who cannot. - Aldo Leopold