• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
The original document at http://freeassemblage.blogspot.com contains live links toreferences.>And look at this winter, already--will you?Which way will you let the "evidence" lead you?<The American Thinker today published this, about the Obama Administration's pushfor energy independence:"According to Reuters, President-Elect Barack Obama has asked Congress "to actwithout delay" to pass legislation that includes doubling alternative energyproduction in the next three years and building a new electricity "smart grid." Hesaid he also planned to modernize 75 percent of federal buildings and improveenergy efficiency in 2 million homes to save consumers billions of dollars onenergy bills."It is important to understand that these pronouncements promoting energyefficiency and alternative energy are not propositions that have anything directlyto do with the controversy over regulations of carbon dioxide or about the "globalwarming" that CO2 allegedly causes. The promoted activities address two separateand, I think, very worthwhile policy imperatives: 1) the nation's energy security,and 2) the need for efficient alternative and conventional energy sources anddelivery systems. The global warming question is separate, and, if mishandled, itcan lead to costly and ill-conceived interference with the two mentionedimperatives, and waste trillions of dollars."On global warming, and man's role in it, my friends who were devoted to theelection of Senator Obama as President, some very close to him, have assured me interms like: "Obama's administration will be evidence-driven" and, "Anti-intellectualism in presidential politics is on its way out." Supporters like theseare "confident that the new administration will be very thoughtful about usingscientific evidence in making policy decisions, including [carbon control]"."Senate Republicans Need to Demand Re-Examination on Global Warming" By Harvey M.SheldonI agree the nation's energy grid, and our dependence on foreign oil, must beprotected. Everything Sheldon said, I agree with.But "evidence driven" scientific policies are not made in a vacuum. The policiesare specifically metaphysical in nature. And policies of the government are stillpolitical.Scientific naturalism as supported by such varied authors as Susan Blackmore, PaulBloom, Paul Broks, Daniel Dennett, Sheldon Drobny, Owen Flanagan, UrsulaGoodenough, Joseph Hilbe, Nicholas Humphrey, Brian Leiter, Thomas Metzinger,Tamler Sommers, John Symons, Tom Clark, and many others apply the metaphysics ofdeterminism to scientific discoveries.(Determinism is the doctrine that every fact in the universe is guided entirely bylaw; that all the facts in the physical universe, and hence also in human history,are absolutely dependent upon and conditioned by their causes. In psychology thisis the doctrine that the will is not free but determined by mental states and atthe same time by physical conditions, since the former cannot exist without thelatter. Syn. with fatalism, necessitarianism, destiny. (adapted from the
 
Dictionary of Philosophy: Runes 1942))In this way, the metaphysics of each of us determines which way the evidence wevalidate is "driven." Some Christians, for example, will validate the "evidence"of God's existence from the fact of existence itself, and from the existence ofthe Bible will conclude that He made the world in six days. That is the power ofmetaphysics, and is a proper power. It is simply the way the mind works in thearea of philosophy.So telling us that a President Obama will set policy based on scientific evidencemeans nothing. Just last Friday, I published scientific conclusions that say"those carbons and other pollutants in the atmosphere are keeping out the sunrather than trapping it inside.""Contrary to the conventional wisdom of the day, the real danger facing humanityis not global warming, but more likely the coming of a new Ice Age," says thewebsite Winningreen."Annual North American temperature since 1998 (11 years of data) is falling overthe period at a rate of 0.78(F)/decade or 7.8(F)per century. At this rate we willbe in an ice age within 5 decades." [emphasis added] Alex Jones' Prison PlanetEl Nino has an 11 year cycle. The solar flares have an 11 year cycle, and the twodon't seem to correspond, unless as with all bodies of water it simply takes thatlong between the ebbing of a solar cycle for the El Nino cycle to ebb.Sub-zero temps and wind-chill factors up to -35F from a Canadian Clipper will pushcool air all the way down to the Gulf of Mexico today."Meanwhile, a developing storm offshore of the Carolinas will race northeastwardovernight, but remain offshore," says The Weather Channel. It concludes by saying,"If nothing else, the storm will leave a legacy of howling northwest winds andbiting wind chills over New England tomorrow morning."And I follow that up, with my metaphysics leading the way with "evidence driven"information, to tell you that this is a map of the "Ocean thermohaline conveyorsystem that transports warm, salty waters into the North Atlantic," a conveyorthat runs right along the American eastern seaboard turning northward near Floridaand rising all the way north to the Arctic Circle, "tempering the climate ofNorthern Europe. If the conveyor should collapse on its return loop near Greenlandand Iceland, Britain's climate could resemble Labrador."http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=643I believe I have demonstrated what "evidence driven" facts mean. Specifically theymean whatever the user can make them mean. What the user makes them mean must bereasonable. If one company can use scientific facts one way to their advantage,and another company can use the same factual evidence to drive their business in adifferent direction, they will do so. It is only when the ends do not demonstratethe rationality of the metaphysics used that the "evidence driven actions" will
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...