I think the tone has changed because we are discussing politics. We should
all be more careful to retain some professional detatchment for the
purposes of discussion.
Just a casual observation about ethics: I think scientists subscribe in
general to an ethic that is not unlike that of a professional news
reporter, who must script the story as an observer even when compelled to
become a participant. When things get extreme, one crosses into the
political arena, such as when Einstein wrote to the US President about
nuclear weapons. Yet, many scientists and non-scientists can be frustrated
with the implicit politics of a mainstream view; and many are also aware
that in fact science is not a neutral observer of society, but a very
important participant. This means responsibility must flow in both
directions. We should not assume that anyone has or has intended to be
irresponsible here, even if breaching the norms of decorum on occasion. I
suspect only the best of intentions from all the contributors, regardless
of their expressed views.
Idealist vs. materialist: Ideas direct sociocultural trajectories
Answer deals with what we can affect.
1), long term statistics clearly show that the efficiency with which we use
resources increases spectacularly.
Ephemeralization explains the stable or declining prices (corrected
for inflation) of physical resources and energy. ... This refutes the
widely accepted pessimistic predictions
(Ehrlich, 1976) according to which our resources are near to exhaustion.
i.e., te
-----------------------------------------------
John J. Kineman, Physical Scientist/Ecologist
National Geophysical Data Center
325 Broadway E/GC1 (3100 Marine St. Rm: A-152)
Boulder, Colorado 80303 USA
(303) 497-6900 (phone)
(303) 497-6513 (fax)
jjk@ngdc.noaa.gov (email)