The Feb. 24 editorial by The Lima News
ignores basic problems with wind energy.
Not exact matches
As it says «the economists» most
basic problem is anthropological», in other words the subject is based upon a narrow and restrictive concept of rationality which
ignores the richness of human relations in favour of an obsolete utilitarianism.
Revivalism tended to
ignore these
basic questions as it concentrated on one great
problem: Are you saved?
«This fix - it - now approach
ignores basic metabolic conditioning for mother and child, negative reinforcement training, long - term behavioral
problems, what it does to the family as a whole and the biblical affirmation of man's nature.»
It's
basic education theory: Unless the
problem presented by a lesson is obvious or «salient,» there's a risk that the lesson may be missed or
ignored.
«Rigorous processes» may help avoid a hockey - stick fiasco, but there are still two very
basic problems: a) the proxy data themselves are often dicey, especially when the time scale is large, and b) the interpretation of the data is based on an «argument from ignorance» (i.e. «we can only explain this if we assume...»), where unknown factors are simply
ignored and it is falsely assumed that we have the knowledge of all factors that could possibly have been involved; if these studies are used to provide evidence for a preconceived hypothesis, I think they are next to worthless.
But the
basic problem with most biofuels is amazingly simple, given that researchers have
ignored it until now: using land to grow fuel leads to the destruction of forests, wetlands and grasslands that store enormous amounts of carbon.