Uh, because the bible and Christianity (like most religions) is full of hate speech...saynta wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 4:22pmHe quoted from the bible. How the f*** can that be called hate speech?amusingname wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 4:12pmHe has every right to post what he wants, and he had posted numerous quotes in the past relating to his faith and the bible without an issue, however when his postings veered into hate speech and contravening a code of conduct that he agreed to by signing a contract, there are consequences.
They talk about a slippery slope if Rugby Australia is allowed to do this kind of thing, what about the opposite. Say Folau wins his case, Can another athlete who comes along and practices extreme Satanism expect to be able to post what ever he wants about ritual abuse without any consequence? To sack them would violate their free speech wouldn't it?
AFL Overkill
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13893
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1313 times
- Been thanked: 2075 times
Re: AFL Overkill
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5212
- Joined: Mon 07 Aug 2006 9:50pm
- Location: Queensland - Beautiful one day ... you know the rest
- Has thanked: 65 times
- Been thanked: 318 times
Re: AFL Overkill
ummm they wouldnt even get a chance to open their mouths before you would be attacking the looney left at the lack of protest
ok I have another contradiction for you - I have no doubt that those screaming about Folaus' rights will fall very quiet when during this term of govt even more anti union, work choices style reforms get introduced into law
- you know the type of changes that make it even easier to sack people
PS if you are worried about me putting words in your mouth - try closing it
Seeya
*************
*************
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18987
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1591 times
- Been thanked: 1998 times
Re: AFL Overkill
âSelf-exculpation, self-justification and special pleading are nothing new in human psychology. But never have these rather unattractive human traits had so much material upon which to workâ. Theodore Dalrymple
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18987
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1591 times
- Been thanked: 1998 times
Re: AFL Overkill
Vanity of vanities; all is vanity.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18605
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1949 times
- Been thanked: 853 times
Re: AFL Overkill
If heâd quoted the Quran rather than the Christian Bible, Rugby Australia would have been called out for religious vilification.
Thatâs how ridiculous things have become
Thatâs how ridiculous things have become
- tedtheodorelogan2018
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3022
- Joined: Fri 14 Sep 2018 12:02am
- Has thanked: 559 times
- Been thanked: 452 times
Re: AFL Overkill
I find it more funny and weird that some races are basically allowed to be racist against other races pubically but others can't. Strange world.
Posters that have admitted they were wrong about Hanna's gastro and the club didn't create a cover story.
Total = 1.
Total = 1.
- Enrico_Misso
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11662
- Joined: Tue 13 Jun 2006 12:11am
- Location: Moorabbin Chapter of The Royal Society of Hagiographers
- Has thanked: 315 times
- Been thanked: 720 times
Re: AFL Overkill
What is really wrong with all this is the failure to separate the individual from the corporation/body that employs them.
It is fair enough that your employer should expect you to obey the laws of the land.
But no employer should insist on you complying with their "political" views.
More particularly why should corporations have political views in the first place?
They should stick to their knitting and focus on delivering their "product" rather than imposing political restraints on their staff in order to "look good" with the PC crowd.
The logical extension is in a communist country where everyone works for the government EVERY one must comply with EVERY view of the state.
And that means the END of ALL personal freedoms.
So the real issue is Rugby Aust, Banks, Insurance companies etc. should have NO RIGHT to impose political views on there staff.
Such contracts should be declared invalid in the name of human rights and personal freedom.
It is fair enough that your employer should expect you to obey the laws of the land.
But no employer should insist on you complying with their "political" views.
More particularly why should corporations have political views in the first place?
They should stick to their knitting and focus on delivering their "product" rather than imposing political restraints on their staff in order to "look good" with the PC crowd.
The logical extension is in a communist country where everyone works for the government EVERY one must comply with EVERY view of the state.
And that means the END of ALL personal freedoms.
So the real issue is Rugby Aust, Banks, Insurance companies etc. should have NO RIGHT to impose political views on there staff.
Such contracts should be declared invalid in the name of human rights and personal freedom.
The rest of Australia can wander mask-free, socialise, eat out, no curfews, no zoning, no police rings of steel, no illogical inconsistent rules.Â
They can even WATCH LIVE FOOTY!
They can even WATCH LIVE FOOTY!
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18605
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1949 times
- Been thanked: 853 times
Re: AFL Overkill
This thread has legs. It may go down as one of Sainsationalâs all-time greats, up there with with âBarks4eva is a sacred cowâ etc.
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18987
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1591 times
- Been thanked: 1998 times
Re: AFL Overkill
Itâs for the good of the brand so it's like other faux issues that corporations pretend they care about like âsustainabilityâ and other groovy words that make people feel good about themselves; but it's mostly meaningless and hypocritical. But the ideological drones who just repeat and don't think haven't realised that enforced speech is a form of mind control. I recall the joke which says that âa totalitarian regime is one that commands you to âshut up!â whereas a liberal democracy says âkeep talking!âEnrico_Misso wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 7:44pm What is really wrong with all this is the failure to separate the individual from the corporation/body that employs them.
It is fair enough that your employer should expect you to obey the laws of the land.
But no employer should insist on you complying with their "political" views.
More particularly why should corporations have political views in the first place?
They should stick to their knitting and focus on delivering their "product" rather than imposing political restraints on their staff in order to "look good" with the PC crowd.
The logical extension is in a communist country where everyone works for the government EVERY one must comply with EVERY view of the state.
And that means the END of ALL personal freedoms.
So the real issue is Rugby Aust, Banks, Insurance companies etc. should have NO RIGHT to impose political views on there staff.
Such contracts should be declared invalid in the name of human rights and personal freedom.
You also canât be free working in a hierarchical corporate structure either. They are like mini totalitarian regimes. Australia is not a free society and is a democracy in name only. Australia is an authoritarian plutocracy made up of thousands of mini totalitarian regimes. âItâs ridiculous to talk about freedom in a society dominated by huge corporations. What kind of freedom is there inside a corporation? Theyâre totalitarian institutions â you take orders from above and maybe give them to people below you. Thereâs about as much freedom as under Stalinism.â
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1347
- Joined: Sat 06 Apr 2019 10:34am
- Has thanked: 278 times
- Been thanked: 321 times
Re: AFL Overkill
?SaintPav wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 8:47pmItâs for the good of the brand so it's like other faux issues that corporations pretend they care about like âsustainabilityâ and other groovy words that make people feel good about themselves; but it's mostly meaningless and hypocritical. But the ideological drones who just repeat and don't think haven't realised that enforced speech is a form of mind control. I recall the joke which says that âa totalitarian regime is one that commands you to âshut up!â whereas a liberal democracy says âkeep talking!âEnrico_Misso wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 7:44pm What is really wrong with all this is the failure to separate the individual from the corporation/body that employs them.
It is fair enough that your employer should expect you to obey the laws of the land.
But no employer should insist on you complying with their "political" views.
More particularly why should corporations have political views in the first place?
They should stick to their knitting and focus on delivering their "product" rather than imposing political restraints on their staff in order to "look good" with the PC crowd.
The logical extension is in a communist country where everyone works for the government EVERY one must comply with EVERY view of the state.
And that means the END of ALL personal freedoms.
So the real issue is Rugby Aust, Banks, Insurance companies etc. should have NO RIGHT to impose political views on there staff.
Such contracts should be declared invalid in the name of human rights and personal freedom.
You also canât be free working in a hierarchical corporate structure either. They are like mini totalitarian regimes. Australia is not a free society and is a democracy in name only. Australia is an authoritarian plutocracy made up of thousands of mini totalitarian regimes. âItâs ridiculous to talk about freedom in a society dominated by huge corporations. What kind of freedom is there inside a corporation? Theyâre totalitarian institutions â you take orders from above and maybe give them to people below you. Thereâs about as much freedom as under Stalinism.â
So the people controlling the actions of governments and corporations is a bad thing?
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18987
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1591 times
- Been thanked: 1998 times
Re: AFL Overkill
When was the last time you directly changed a government policy?
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13893
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1313 times
- Been thanked: 2075 times
Re: AFL Overkill
Since when is deciding not to treat a section of society as sub-humans a âpoliticalâ view?Enrico_Misso wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 7:44pm What is really wrong with all this is the failure to separate the individual from the corporation/body that employs them.
It is fair enough that your employer should expect you to obey the laws of the land.
But no employer should insist on you complying with their "political" views.
More particularly why should corporations have political views in the first place?
They should stick to their knitting and focus on delivering their "product" rather than imposing political restraints on their staff in order to "look good" with the PC crowd.
The logical extension is in a communist country where everyone works for the government EVERY one must comply with EVERY view of the state.
And that means the END of ALL personal freedoms.
So the real issue is Rugby Aust, Banks, Insurance companies etc. should have NO RIGHT to impose political views on there staff.
Such contracts should be declared invalid in the name of human rights and personal freedom.
Just like climate change isnât a âpoliticalâ issue, itâs scientific consensus, treating homosexuals equally is just the right thing to do as a human being, âpoliticsâ doesnât even come in to it.
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13893
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1313 times
- Been thanked: 2075 times
Re: AFL Overkill
Marriage equality vote.
And how embarrassing that it even had to come to that.
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
- skeptic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 16962
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
- Has thanked: 3608 times
- Been thanked: 2882 times
Re: AFL Overkill
One of the big reasons why a lot of ppl feel democracy is coming under fire in the modern world...
Can't quite remember who said it but it was words to the effect of: democracy allows the right for individuals to accept or reject the ideas of the people in charge
- skeptic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 16962
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
- Has thanked: 3608 times
- Been thanked: 2882 times
Re: AFL Overkill
Really interesting discussion, especially the racial stuff
I remember somebody posted some pretty hateful things about Muslims on this site a while ago... always really upset me
I remember somebody posted some pretty hateful things about Muslims on this site a while ago... always really upset me
- Dis Believer
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5091
- Joined: Sun 28 Mar 2004 1:42pm
- Location: The terraces at Moorabbin, in the pouring rain.......
- Has thanked: 265 times
- Been thanked: 273 times
Re: AFL Overkill
What shrieking SJW blather!! Where or when in this debate was anyone treated as "sub-human".....talk about over-reach. And consensus has nothing to do with science. Science is about data, and whether or not is supports the hypothesis. And for the record the "97% consensus" that gets trotted out has been debunked so many times it laughable. The facts of that "survey" are freely available on-line, maybe read up and stop making a dill of yourself......The_Dud wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 9:16pmSince when is deciding not to treat a section of society as sub-humans a âpoliticalâ view?Enrico_Misso wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 7:44pm What is really wrong with all this is the failure to separate the individual from the corporation/body that employs them.
It is fair enough that your employer should expect you to obey the laws of the land.
But no employer should insist on you complying with their "political" views.
More particularly why should corporations have political views in the first place?
They should stick to their knitting and focus on delivering their "product" rather than imposing political restraints on their staff in order to "look good" with the PC crowd.
The logical extension is in a communist country where everyone works for the government EVERY one must comply with EVERY view of the state.
And that means the END of ALL personal freedoms.
So the real issue is Rugby Aust, Banks, Insurance companies etc. should have NO RIGHT to impose political views on there staff.
Such contracts should be declared invalid in the name of human rights and personal freedom.
Just like climate change isnât a âpoliticalâ issue, itâs scientific consensus, treating homosexuals equally is just the right thing to do as a human being, âpoliticsâ doesnât even come in to it.
If you want to go on a crusade to stop innocents being treated as sub-human, maybe have a crack at the Chinese authorities running a massive human organ harvesting racket on political prisoners.....you might struggle a bit though, the Chinese blokes don't give a crap about hashtags and "likes" on facebook, so you'll need a new skillset.....
The heavy metal artist formerly known as True Believer!
IF you look around the room and can't identify who the sucker is, then it's probably you!
IF you look around the room and can't identify who the sucker is, then it's probably you!
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18987
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1591 times
- Been thanked: 1998 times
Re: AFL Overkill
I was happy to vote yes but identify politics is a useful distraction (divide and conquer).
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13893
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1313 times
- Been thanked: 2075 times
Re: AFL Overkill
Do you get all your science info straight from Andrew Bolt?True Believer wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 10:03pmWhat shrieking SJW blather!! Where or when in this debate was anyone treated as "sub-human".....talk about over-reach. And consensus has nothing to do with science. Science is about data, and whether or not is supports the hypothesis. And for the record the "97% consensus" that gets trotted out has been debunked so many times it laughable. The facts of that "survey" are freely available on-line, maybe read up and stop making a dill of yourself......The_Dud wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 9:16pmSince when is deciding not to treat a section of society as sub-humans a âpoliticalâ view?Enrico_Misso wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 7:44pm What is really wrong with all this is the failure to separate the individual from the corporation/body that employs them.
It is fair enough that your employer should expect you to obey the laws of the land.
But no employer should insist on you complying with their "political" views.
More particularly why should corporations have political views in the first place?
They should stick to their knitting and focus on delivering their "product" rather than imposing political restraints on their staff in order to "look good" with the PC crowd.
The logical extension is in a communist country where everyone works for the government EVERY one must comply with EVERY view of the state.
And that means the END of ALL personal freedoms.
So the real issue is Rugby Aust, Banks, Insurance companies etc. should have NO RIGHT to impose political views on there staff.
Such contracts should be declared invalid in the name of human rights and personal freedom.
Just like climate change isnât a âpoliticalâ issue, itâs scientific consensus, treating homosexuals equally is just the right thing to do as a human being, âpoliticsâ doesnât even come in to it.
If you want to go on a crusade to stop innocents being treated as sub-human, maybe have a crack at the Chinese authorities running a massive human organ harvesting racket on political prisoners.....you might struggle a bit though, the Chinese blokes don't give a crap about hashtags and "likes" on facebook, so you'll need a new skillset.....
Telling people theyâre âgoing to hellâ (inset any derogatory term) purely because of the way they were born, and they need to âfix themselvesâ to be deemed worthy of yourself and your imaginary god sounds like youâre not quite placing them on the same level as yourself.
And interesting (not surprising though) how you went straight to China (dang Asians and theyâre funny eyes, eh) when referencing âinnocents being treated as sub-humanâ when you could have stayed much closer to home and brought up refugee children being indefinitely locked up by the Australian Government. But hey, I suppose thats just white on brown crime, so move along, nothing to see here!
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
- tedtheodorelogan2018
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3022
- Joined: Fri 14 Sep 2018 12:02am
- Has thanked: 559 times
- Been thanked: 452 times
Re: AFL Overkill
Seriously Dudley...you're comparing Australia's policies on some refugees compared to what happens to people in bad parts of the world?
Posters that have admitted they were wrong about Hanna's gastro and the club didn't create a cover story.
Total = 1.
Total = 1.
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18987
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1591 times
- Been thanked: 1998 times
Re: AFL Overkill
Indefinite detention must be fun but at least you called them refugees.tedtheodorelogan2018 wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 11:20pm Seriously Dudley...you're comparing Australia's policies on some refugees compared to what happens to people in bad parts of the world?
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
- The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13893
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1313 times
- Been thanked: 2075 times
Re: AFL Overkill
I donât think youâll find a government that exists that isnât corrupt and hasnât done shitty things to people.tedtheodorelogan2018 wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 11:20pm Seriously Dudley...you're comparing Australia's policies on some refugees compared to what happens to people in bad parts of the world?
Just says a lot that his default was to go straight to the ACA-loving crowdâs favourite scapegoat, China, when there are plenty more close to home and relevant examples to reference.
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18987
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1591 times
- Been thanked: 1998 times
Re: AFL Overkill
Some might call it the social contract but all states view and treat the people it rules as riff-raff and lesser beings to be manipulated, coerced, and exploited. We are all expendable for reasons of state.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
- Dis Believer
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5091
- Joined: Sun 28 Mar 2004 1:42pm
- Location: The terraces at Moorabbin, in the pouring rain.......
- Has thanked: 265 times
- Been thanked: 273 times
Re: AFL Overkill
You're kidding right!! You don't consider state run organ harvesting for profit on a massive scale to be one of the most abhorrent acts imaginable??!! Literally hundreds of thousands of people, a large portion of whom are "political prisoners" because of their religious beliefs, are being murdered for profit, in a scheme that is not only state-sanctioned, it's state run !! And you reckon I'm picking on them because of your misguided political leanings, because naturally anyone who doesn't agree with you, must be in thrall to Andrew Bolt.The_Dud wrote: âWed 03 Jul 2019 12:04amI donât think youâll find a government that exists that isnât corrupt and hasnât done shitty things to people.tedtheodorelogan2018 wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 11:20pm Seriously Dudley...you're comparing Australia's policies on some refugees compared to what happens to people in bad parts of the world?
Just says a lot that his default was to go straight to the ACA-loving crowdâs favourite scapegoat, China, when there are plenty more close to home and relevant examples to reference.
For what it's worth, I have no political allegiances, although I tend to be right of centre, due largely to a belief that the smaller the state mechanism, the better for those that are under it's governance. I have also been around long enough to know that reading original documents extensively, rather than media "abridged" versions is far more informative than simply swallowing whatever distorted crap is spewed from the get-up website. I am also smart enough to know that the truth of most things can be found by following the money. In the case of climate change it's actually the rivers of gold that lead straight to the UN and into the pockets of it's various preachers such as Flannery, who whilst having failed to actually determine (or even prove) the extent of man's influence on climate change, was busily building an expensive waterfront property whilst blustering that sea level rises would be to catastrophic levels beyond imagination. Not only that, whilst in the employ of the Australian Taxpayer, he managed to secure government grant worth tens of millions of dollars for an experimental power project that went belly up - and took all of our money with it! Fancy that......
The heavy metal artist formerly known as True Believer!
IF you look around the room and can't identify who the sucker is, then it's probably you!
IF you look around the room and can't identify who the sucker is, then it's probably you!
- SaintPav
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18987
- Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
- Location: Alma Road
- Has thanked: 1591 times
- Been thanked: 1998 times
Re: AFL Overkill
So you donât believe the climate science? Interesting.True Believer wrote: âWed 03 Jul 2019 10:10amYou're kidding right!! You don't consider state run organ harvesting for profit on a massive scale to be one of the most abhorrent acts imaginable??!! Literally hundreds of thousands of people, a large portion of whom are "political prisoners" because of their religious beliefs, are being murdered for profit, in a scheme that is not only state-sanctioned, it's state run !! And you reckon I'm picking on them because of your misguided political leanings, because naturally anyone who doesn't agree with you, must be in thrall to Andrew Bolt.The_Dud wrote: âWed 03 Jul 2019 12:04amI donât think youâll find a government that exists that isnât corrupt and hasnât done shitty things to people.tedtheodorelogan2018 wrote: âTue 02 Jul 2019 11:20pm Seriously Dudley...you're comparing Australia's policies on some refugees compared to what happens to people in bad parts of the world?
Just says a lot that his default was to go straight to the ACA-loving crowdâs favourite scapegoat, China, when there are plenty more close to home and relevant examples to reference.
For what it's worth, I have no political allegiances, although I tend to be right of centre, due largely to a belief that the smaller the state mechanism, the better for those that are under it's governance. I have also been around long enough to know that reading original documents extensively, rather than media "abridged" versions is far more informative than simply swallowing whatever distorted crap is spewed from the get-up website. I am also smart enough to know that the truth of most things can be found by following the money. In the case of climate change it's actually the rivers of gold that lead straight to the UN and into the pockets of it's various preachers such as Flannery, who whilst having failed to actually determine (or even prove) the extent of man's influence on climate change, was busily building an expensive waterfront property whilst blustering that sea level rises would be to catastrophic levels beyond imagination. Not only that, whilst in the employ of the Australian Taxpayer, he managed to secure government grant worth tens of millions of dollars for an experimental power project that went belly up - and took all of our money with it! Fancy that......
I agree with your principal of following the money but I would have thought that big business and the fossil fuel industry has a greater incentive and capacity to delay, mislead and lie about the massive readjustment required.
Anyway, Government and media typically present the problem as a false choice between two options. The third choice is that weâre totally screwed and itâs probably too late.
Climate science forecasts have undershot actual outcomes and err on the âside of least dramaâ.
The scientific method isnât perfect but itâs all we have. Anyway, I trust NASA and the Royal Society more than I trust idiots like Tony Abbott and Maurice Newman.
Climate change prediction: Erring on the side of least drama? Keynyn Brysse a,*, Naomi Oreskes b, Jessica OâReilly c, Michael Oppenheimer d
a Program in Science, Technology and Society, Office of Interdisciplinary Studies, University of Alberta, Canada
b History and Science Studies, University of California, San Diego, United States
c Department of Sociology, College of St. Benedict/St. Johnâs University, United States
d Department of Geosciences and Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, United States
ABSTRACT
Over the past two decades, skeptics of the reality and significance of anthropogenic climate change have frequently accused climate scientists of ââalarmismââ: of over-interpreting or overreacting to evidence of human impacts on the climate system. However, the available evidence suggests that scientists have in fact been conservative in their projections of the impacts of climate change. In particular, we discuss recent studies showing that at least some of the key attributes of global warming from increased atmospheric greenhouse gases have been under-predicted, particularly in IPCC assessments of the physical science, by Working Group I. We also note the less frequent manifestation of over-prediction of key characteristics of climate in such assessments. We suggest, therefore, that scientists are biased not toward alarmism but rather the reverse: toward cautious estimates, where we define caution as erring on the side of less rather than more alarming predictions. We call this tendency ââerring on the side of least drama (ESLD).ââ We explore some cases of ESLD at work, including predictions of Arctic ozone depletion and the possible disintegration of the West Antarctic ice sheet, and suggest some possible causes of this directional bias, including adherence to the scientific norms of restraint, objectivity, skepticism, rationality, dispassion, and moderation. We conclude with suggestions for further work to identify and explore ESLD.
Last edited by SaintPav on Wed 03 Jul 2019 12:43pm, edited 1 time in total.
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.