Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Twitter
Support

 

Recent posts
Recent comments
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Discussion > The frighteningly large gap between known facts and government policy.

I know that a great many people do not really care about things that will not happen in their lifetimes. At the moment the UN, The EU and our coalition government are spending billions to prevent perceived problems that 'would not' affect a large number of those alive today. The problems attracting the money all share a common aspect; they are all unproven.
We are spending billions on ridding our economy of CO2 and on 'growing a circular economy' (put that in your plain speaking hate list and smoke it).
At the same time there are known and proven threats that we are doing nothing about, threats that we know can wipe out all or almost all life on earth. Nature (worshiped by those who espouse the carbon free economy and the need to recycle) can do nothing to prevent asteroid strikes and eruptions by super volcanoes like Yellowstone park.
The only thing that just may come with answers is human intelligence and ingenuity, knowledge and research, technology.
Saving resources, lowering CO2, saving species and recycling are all utterly pointless unless the human race survives, thrives, grows its economy and its technology and recognises the real threats.

Jun 6, 2014 at 6:58 PM | Registered CommenterDung

The Western world has gone insane and I don't see an outbreak of sanity in the foreseeable future.

Jun 6, 2014 at 8:25 PM | Registered CommenterMartin A

Martin A,

Seconded.

Jun 7, 2014 at 1:56 PM | Unregistered Commenterjones

"The only thing that just may come with answers is human intelligence and ingenuity, knowledge and research, technology."

Ah, research and technology, great stuff! Except your Bishop and many of your fellow commenters rejoice when research is cut. http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2014/6/4/hitting-back-at-scientivists.html

The "lucky country" he describes Australia for being able to cut the CSIRO, basic research at the Australian Research Council, the Australian Institute for Marine Science and the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, R&D and innovation programs, and virtually every federal renewable energy program, and to 'slash' funding for postgraduate researchers, for environmental science, clean technologies, water science and Cooperative Research Centres. Lucky country indeed, say the Bishop, with no dissenters.

Ok, I get it, you want research but only the sort of research you approve of.

Jun 7, 2014 at 8:04 PM | Unregistered CommenterLa Buena

La Buena,

What sort of research do you want?

Jun 7, 2014 at 8:40 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Reed

La Buena

Forgive me for not wishing to fund research for the sake of research or research that simply pays to keep a scientist in work. There are many who doubt that research into renewable energy is needed (right now), that environmental issues currently do not include a host of totally valueless subjects and that water is not a virtually inexhaustible commodity which with graphene filters can be easily and cheaply purified.
Are there any who doubt that a catastrophic asteroid strike WILL happen or that a super volcano WILL happen or even that an ice age WILL happen again?

Jun 7, 2014 at 8:47 PM | Registered CommenterDung

Alan, scientific research is a cornerstone of economic growth and of our modern prosperity. Successful societies engage in lots of it, so the more the better. I'd prefer to have clever people researching what interests them in the hope that is benefits society than have them sucked into banks to invent clever ways to rob society. I'm not going to start picking winners. I'm not going to start saying that we should cut all geological research aimed at discovering or extracting resources and I have never heard of a "green" government shutting down all such research for ideological reasons or of green blog commenters rejoicing at the prospect of that.

Dung, "Forgive me..." - no, sorry. Research for the sake of research is fundamental to technological progress. Research into asteroids or volcanoes or ice ages, yes of course, although the ice age thing sounds like climate science - just the sort of thing Abbott would shut down.

Jun 7, 2014 at 9:40 PM | Unregistered CommenterLa Buena

La Buena,

Thank you.
What sort of research do you not want?

Jun 8, 2014 at 2:58 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Reed

As I said, "I'm not going to start picking winners". Research is good, whatever the subject. Clearly the amount available to spend on research is finite. So someone has to choose, to set priorities. But the choices should be apolitical and made by scientifically literate and respected and preferably disinterested people.

Jun 8, 2014 at 3:30 PM | Unregistered CommenterLa Buena

La Buena,

Thank you.

I have no further questions.

Jun 8, 2014 at 6:26 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Reed