Master CraftsMon

Monday, January 28, 2008

Master CraftsMon - Aired Monday, January 28, 2008 at about 11pm CST

Master CraftsMon - Aired Monday, January 28, 2008 at about 11pm CST

KEOS 89.1 FM College Station.

You are listening to the
Master CraftsMon, a program of debate and then
social activism from the Right. On this program we
will be exploring how to use the Internet as a means
of gathering resources to affect positive social
change in a community.

For I am but a voice from the velvet black calling to you across the
gulf of our mutual incomprehension.
This is the penultimate program which means the second to the last
program. February 4 is my last show.
o *Waiting for Godot is a play by Samuel Beckett*
o I needed streaming and I do not think it will come soon here at KEOS
o I perceive that we have social problems, but I do not
believe that the government can sovle them.
o I wanted to rally people to make changes.
o With 30 people listening, I do not think that is reasonable.

Eileen asked me why my mind was closed on Global Warming last week. Let's first look at burden of proof. How do we know something is 'True'.

Outside a legal context, "burden of proof" means that someone suggesting a new theory or stating a claim must provide evidence to support it: it is not sufficient to say "you can't disprove this." Specifically, when anyone is making a bold claim, it is not someone else's responsibility to disprove the claim, but is rather the responsibility of the person who is making the bold claim to prove it. In short, X is not proven simply because "not X" cannot be proven (see negative proof).

Taken more generally, the standard of proof demanded to establish any particular conclusion varies with the subject under discussion. Just as there is a difference between the standard required for a criminal conviction and in a civil case, so there are different standards of proof applied in many other areas of life.

The less reasonable a statement seems, the more proof it requires. The scientific consensus on cold fusion is a good example. The majority believes this can not really work, because believing that it would do so would force the alteration of a great many other tested and generally accepted theories about nuclear physics.

In legal matters, there are levels of proof: Air of reality, Reasonable suspicion, Probable cause, preponderance of evidence, Clear and convincing evidence and then the gold standard of truth in the legal profession, Beyond reasonable doubt.
Global Warming is the product of an Information Cascade
**EXPOUND on Information Cascade**

Before we get to Global Warming, let me show you some of the projects that the

Most of what I have read has been compiled by, which is
at run by Steven Milloy


* Rachel Carson and silent spring **EXPOUND on what it said**
* William Ruckelshaus of the Nixon Administration banned it in 1972.
* About 96M people died of malaria who would not have

If you can get your mind around this, a good number of the leaders in the environmental movement perceive this figure to be a good thing.

Population control advocates blamed DDT for increasing third world population. In the 1960s, World Health Organization authorities believed there was no alternative to the overpopulation problem but to assure than up to 40 percent of the children in poor nations would die of malaria. As an official of the Agency for International Development stated, "Rather dead than alive and riotously reproducing."
[Desowitz, RS. 1992. Malaria Capers, W.W. Norton & Company]

What sweethearts.

If you took one teaspoon of DDT vs one teaspoon of aspirin, which would would make you sicker quicker? The dosage makes the poison.

They unbanned DDT last year.
**EXPOUND on the 55 speed limit Save lives save gas**
o More time on the road means more chances to get hurt. Automobile travel
is inherently unsafe. On balance cost lives and money because of additional
travel cost
o Did not save gas
Paul Ehrlich in the late 1960's came up with the idea that we were slipping into a new Ice Age. He was making the point that starting in 1945, the world temperature had dropped precipiously, therefore we needed to expect the next ice age to appear ten thousand years early.

In 1975, the temperature started back up. Ehrlich did a 180 in the 1980's and started touting global warming with just as much fervor as he had touted global cooling.

I have a problem with that.
Now let us talk about the ozone layer and dreaded freon.


As every schoolboy should by now have read, total columnar ozone (the amount over a given point) would only amount to a paltry couple of millimetres if brought down to sea level. So, does this mean that our defence, our critical solar shield we call the ozone layer, is a thin and fragile membrane about the atmosphere, finite and being worn threadbare by assault from anthropogenic (human produced) chemicals? Hardly, although one could be forgiven for having such an impression given the hysteria generated by various chemophobes and misanthropes. Stratospheric ozone is not a fixed and finite resource but is constantly created - and destroyed - by solar radiation.

The banning of freon saved the lives of five hypothetical people each year in the Northern hemisphere at the cost of thousands dead in the Southern hemisphere because the alternatives to freon cost more, thus the Third Worlders could not refrigerate drugs needed to counter diseases.
In these are four information cascades that have happened in the last 50 years that have accomplished nothing while making life worse for the people it perported to help. In short the people putting forth human caused Global Warming have a rotten track record.

Now let us look at Global Warming.
o Margaret Thatcher and the coal miners strikes
o The heat island effect **EXPOUND**
o The lack of data out to sea
o The controversy dealing with the satellite data
o South Sea Islands are melting away. **EXPOUND on Starfish and coral**
o James Hansen of NASA is another big player in Gloabl Warming *EXPOUND - Heat Island Effect model disproved last year*
o **EXPOUND**The models from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change not based in reality

Again, let us talk about levels of proof: Air of reality, Reasonable suspicion, Probable cause, preponderance of evidence, Clear and convincing evidence and then the gold standard of truth in the legal profession, Beyond reasonable doubt.

**EXPOUND on Precautionary Principle**