Socialized Health Care in the USA

[--Pete]

Hi,

I´m sorry but the argument that since we don´t know everything we don´t know anything (or at least we can´t do anything based on the knowledge we have) . . . is a faulty one . . .

It is indeed a faulty argument. However, it is not his argument (nor mine). It is the Republicat's misrepresentation of his argument. So, go fault them.

. . . - which is pretty much the synopsis of his work as best I can tell - . . .

Then you need to rethink his work, maybe reread it (or read it rather than reading someone's commentary on it).

. . . very popular among people who don´t want to accept scientific concensuses (is that the plural?).

But he does accept global warming, what he does not agree with is the best way to control it. Unlike the scientists who *never* consider the economic aspect ("Why use lead if gold will do?"), he wants to at least consider more reasonable options.

Oh, and it probably should be 'consensi', pronounced 'con-sense-eye'. Then again, since it is *not* a Latin word (though it is derived from one), 'concensuses' can work. Best way to avoid the problem is to avoid the plural.;)

I ask that you show where the second link I posted is wrong in tearing him to shreds.

It is correct in tearing to shreds the strawman set up. Since that was not his argument, it doesn't tear *him* to shreds.

Every time I try and continue this post it turns into a rant so I´ll stop here.

Ah, come on. Do it for the fun of it.;)

--Pete