Nin, I totally got that. Forgive my embarrassing attempt at humorous re-interpretation of your de-escalation post.  (Plus I was more referring to your very last line, which amused me.)

Malachy_Sunblade wrote:

You've got a sore throat, a stuffy nose and a fever.  Common view, you've got a cold.  You go to the doctor, he/she does a quick check, hands you some medicine, BOOM, you have the answer you need.  Take these tablets twice a day for a week, you'll feel better.  What the doctor, who understands these complex systems in a way that most people may not, doesn't have to say is... "I'm giving you these pills which are a mixture of Acetaminophen, for the fever, combined with Pseudoephedrine for the congestion, held together by a glucose based binding agent.  Your stomach acids will help break the pills apart, while your liver filters through these chemicals, cutting out certain elements of it and enhancing the others, so that these chemicals will then go to the parts of your body, i.e. your sinuses and hypothalamus, and thusly reduce the amount of inflammation in your sinus tissue and dry up the phlegm that's trapped inside, as well as reduce your overall body temp..." and so on and so on (apologies if the information contained within is inaccurate, but I don't do science very well).  The reality of this is that, while knowing how things work is nice, I have the following information - My condition has been examined by a professional, whom I trust to know what's going on; He has given me this item to fix the issue, and if I take it as prescribed, I'll feel better.  The rest of it, unnecessary.  Useful, but unnecessary.  Cause, effect, problem, solution.


...


I know that this issue is too big to break down in a way that I'm going to be happy with the answer, so does anybody that thinks like I do.  But you folks with the science degrees that are researching these things, that's what you do.  I'm trusting you guys, as the experts, to help me to understand, and at least get me moving on a path that will actually do something positive.

Part of the problem, as I see it, is that people trust their doctors a hell of a lot more than they trust their environmental scientists.  This is for an obvious reason.  20 years ago, how many renowned scientists were involved in the environment?  It seemed more like a fall-back science, like meteorology.  So the general feeling is that people warning about a collapsing environment are a bunch of tree hugging hippies.  Well, they were, but no one noticed when those hippies got pushed aside (and ignored) by the real scientists that began to look at the problem, and then issue legitimate, sound warnings.  It was all still dismissable due to the history.  To really understand things now, one needs to listen to the people who are really in-the-know, and not the most sensationalist article titles.  For one good choice, I would refer you to Stephen Chu.  Google him if you want to learn some real facts.  His powerpoint presentations can be a bit sloppy/confusing, but his info is good. 

You can see one Stephen Chu talk here:
http://www.aaas.org/meetings/Annual_Mee … ures.shtml
though you have to download the powerpoint to see the slides...the video is just him at the podium.  He actually answers a few questions relevant to this debate in the question session near the end of this talk.

Something of a tangent, but the worst job I've ever had was working for a real estate agent who dealt with foreclosed homes. He used to basically stalk the people who were going into foreclosure trying to "help" them keep their homes (for a fee). Then if they didn't take his help and they were foreclosed on he would try to get the title directly from the bank with no bid, and then turn around and sell it for like twice what he had bought it for. It was really gruesome work.

Hiragana wrote:

Hey lian? No problem at all! I was just worried I obfuscated my intent with my attempt to be diplomatic, so I was clarifying my position. Forgive me if I seem over-earnest and humorless ;)


Okies, I am fleeing from this thread now.

I didn't think that at all. I was amused, however, at lian's "Hippie chick from Auros and the Debaters" phrase. Made me think of an early Smarch exchange between Tad and Elder Turtle. During the infamous "Tad's List" episode (iirc), Turtle very bravely took a stance and posted the eternal question, "can't we all just get along" and Tad said something about peace & hippies in response -- all in good fun, of course. Just an interesting flashback bit there.

I think your suggestion is a good one & can easily be honored. I had a little more of a reply to Jen, so perhaps I'll just start a new thread for it...

Nin, no hard feelings, but I don't really have a knack with words, so I concluded I did that hit-and-miss thing again and left everyone with blank stares (you know, the online equivalent of telling a joke and being met with silence in a large room, uh) Aaaah, now I'm embarrassed enough to join you in the fleeing!

*runs*

lian wrote:

*runs*

No! You want to go THAT way!  *points*

*stops short* Huh?  Which...which way...?


Well, I'd rather exit to the left, thank you very much. And pointedly avoid the very visible tripwire, nya!

So that's what happened to my nail polish!  *shakes fist at Ceywren*

Yes.  It's spring.

Hiragana wrote:

Orange nail polish?

:o

I wasn't going to ask...hehe

Aha!  Now we're about to have a real debate!  *rolls up sleeves*

I beat you all, because I have apricot shimmer nail polish.  Like orange, only more <elegant> AhaHAHA!!

(not that I'd wear it, but hey...it is in my possession.)