Gas Prices again- then back to pianos.

[Kevin E. Ramsey RPT]

Well said. I really think that there aren't any people out there who really
want to ruin the environment. When alternate means of transportation become
available, and practical, I applaud their use. Here in AZ., I have three
different garbage containers, and I faithfully sort my refuse into them
appropriately. I have two vehicles, both of which I maintain faithfully,
(and because I have to pass emissions tests regularly, although I'd keep
them tuned anyway.) When the supply of gasoline becomes cost-prohibitive,
then I'll find some other way to get around.
    I just don't like the idea of living in a cold, dark, cave, because my
lifestyle is considered wasteful by the standards held by someone in
Calcutta.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Brekne" <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 10:11 PM
Subject: Re: Gas Prices again- then back to pianos.


>
>
> Robert Goodale wrote:
>
> > DING  DONG  DING DANG DIN DUNGY DANG!!
> >
> > Sorry, incorrect answer, that's NOT what I said.  No one is disputing
that the
> > climate appears to be changing.  The possible cause of it and effects
are the
> > issues.  To have sound scientific conclusions one must first apply the
scientific
> > method.
> > 1.  A theory
> > 2.  A hypothesis to test the theory
> > 3.  A sample model
> > 4.  A control group model
> > 5.  A substantial and credible amount of tested data from both the
sample and
> > control group to support the hypothesis.
> >
> > Unfortunately it is not possible to create a sample group and a control
group for
> > the earth's environment.  This only leaves theory with no practical data
in which to
> > prove a theory, i.e. are evil rotten humans ruining the earth by using
toaster
> > ovens.
>
> Grin... why how convenient for those wishing to discount the possibility
that these
> folks are correct.
>
> Er...  I think you should review your scientific method. No insult
intended. Regardless
> of the ability to affirm or disaffirm, it should be obvious to even the
most casual
> observers that you can only pump so much exhaust into the air, so many
waste chemicals
> into the sewers, build so many garbage dumps, cut down so many forests,
fish so many
> fish..... before things start to go bad....
>
> The basic problem boils down to whether or not a thinking human being is
willing to
> admit or not that the species is capable of impacting our environment to a
significant
> degree.....be that positively or negatively. I personally dont have any
problem seeing
> that to be true, and personally view the positions of  "You cant prove
anything" or
> "this is all a bunch of political nonsense" as irrelavant balderdash..
>
>
> > Then comes the politics and the media which tends to skip chapters 9 and
10
> > and go straight to the end of the book at chapter 47 and predict dooms
day if we
> > don't stop using outdoor BBQs.
>
> I suppose I can understand how you arrive at this conclusion given your
obvious
> dedication to sound research and scientific method.... grin...
>
> >
> > Nuf said, I got to go.  I have to drive my evil gas consuming
transportation device
> > to a clients home tonight to do a tuning.  Then I have to finish
installing an evil
> > electric energy consuming PianoDisc system.
>
> I didnt say anything was evil about these things... what does evil have to
do with it
> ???
>
> >
> >
> > Rob Goodale, RPT
> > Las Vegas, NV
> >
> > Richard Brekne wrote:
> >
> > > So let me see if I understand you Robert... virtually the entire
scientific
> > > community, save a few Rush Limbaugh employees... grin.., all
government agencies
> > > accross the globe, and virtually everyone who has used a greater
portion of there
> > > lives studying this climate stuff are all wrong,,,,, and you are
right..
>
> --
> Richard Brekne
> RPT, N.P.T.F.
> Bergen, Norway
>
>