Do Monarchs need Paul Cherubini?

[Nigel Venters]

Dear all,
Lets all remember what unquestioned science has let to.....I've used this
example before...but I hope it illustrates the problem...Eminent Victorian
scientists recommended that missionaries built their houses in Africa with
all the doors and windows facing away from water to avoid Malaria...I have
been to Livingstonia in Malawi...where the houses still stand...dutifully
built with windows and doors facing away from the lake and just behind the
graveyard is full of people that believed in them...long dead from
Malaria....example too long ago? Things don't change....OK how about this
then...Mad cow disease cannot be passed to humans...Government Chief Vet
UK...a few years ago...another eminent scientist who expressed concern at
that time was ridiculed ....well we all know the answer now don't we?...New
variant CJD is with us! Unquestioned science is to look through a tunnel and
accept the self belief of individuals that do not always see the big
picture. Much wonderful research is done by scientists in all walks of
life...answering questions that have perplexed mankind for
generations...however I do hope that there will always be people that
question the "Eminent" scientists...and...amazingly they only need to have
passed the degree from the "University of life" with a distinction in
"Common sense" before they can also study the problem and come up with their
theory! We can then all balance the facts and maybe understand better the
problem. Scientists who step over the line for whatever reason are only
short term gainers...in years to come the future generations will all laugh
at their theories that prove to be rubbish. So be it! I suggest USA East
West Monarchs theory will be a good one to follow for a good laugh in years
to come...however lets just see what is proved over the coming years, it
seems a nonsense to me at this time, but I personally don't have enough
information to try and sway others!
Nigel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Taylor" <drivingiron at earthlink.net>
To: <patfoley at csus.edu>; <monarch at saber.net>
Cc: "Leps-l" <Leps-l at lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 9:09 AM
Subject: Re: Do Monarchs need Paul Cherubini?


> List + Pat:
>
> I, for one, find Paul to be a calm and reasoning voice midst large
> quantities of smoke and mirrors. He is almost always under attack -
> frequently strident - and he keeps his cool.
>
> Jim Taylor
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Patrick Foley" <patfoley at csus.edu>
> To: <monarch at saber.net>
> Cc: "Leps-l" <Leps-l at lists.yale.edu>
> Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 8:52 PM
> Subject: Do Monarchs need Paul Cherubini?
>
>
> > Dear Lepsters,
> >
> > Am I the only one who has noticed that
> >
> > 1) Paul Cherubini has accused me of embracing dishonest science although
I
> am
> > clearly on record against scientific error while recognizing that error
is
> part of
> > the business of science. Somehow Paul thinks that when Paul Ehrlich
> predicts the
> > future, all environmentalists should feel responsible if he is wrong.
> There is a
> > difference between scientific research and speculative prophecy. Most of
> us
> > understand this. Paul pretends not to.
> >
> > 2) Paul Cherubini has not answered my question concerning his financial
> interests
> > in the Monarch business.
> >
> > 3) Paul Cherubini has yet to answer the claims that he takes on false
> email
> > identities for lobbying purposes.
> >
> > I want to make it clear that while I disagree with many things Paul
says,
> he
> > certainly knows a lot about Monarchs. But I cannot trust anything he
says
> until he
> > answers these questions. Can you?
> >
> > Patrick Foley
> > patfoley at csus.edu
> >
> > Paul Cherubini wrote:
> >
> > > Pat wrote:
> > >
> > > > Jim, I also am dubious about Brower's figures, but I can't
> > > > find out how he calculated them except hearsay.
> > > > Does anyone have a pointer to a Brower paper which clears this up.
> > >
> > > Pat, here is the paper that Brower is preparing:
> > > http://www.saber.net/~monarch/kustbrower.JPG
> > >
> > > > It is well established that many corporations have lied,
> > > > cheated and stolen using bogus science. Consider the tobacco
industry
> > > > alone, but there are plenty of examples. Academic fraud occurs but
is
> > > > relatively rare.  Any honest person who has worked for
> > > > industry (as I have) knows how much pressure there is to fudge.
> > > > Are you disagreeing with me from principle or are you being paid to
do
> > > > so?
> > >
> > > Pat, I guess we disagree about what constitutes academic dishonesty.
> When
> > > a scientist slants or distorts data or the interpretation of data in a
> way that
> > > overstates a human health or environmental concern, I consider it
> academic
> > > dishonesty. However, you apparently feel that if a scientist slants or
> distorts
> > > in order to draw attention to an environmental concern, then it should
> be
> > > considered merely exaggerating or overstating the concern.
> > >
> > > For example, in regard to Paul Ehrlich's predictions of ecosystem
> > > collapse and global famine during the 80's and 90's you wrote:
> > >
> > > "Paul Ehrlich does exaggerate, but almost all of the dangers he
> identifies are
> > > real, do need attention, and have gotten attention precisely because
of
> > > doomsayers like him."
> > >
> > > Ehrlich: (considered merely exaggerating)
> > >
> > >  -  "The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and
> > >   1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite
> > >   of any crash programs embarked upon now. . America's vast
> > >   agricultural surpluses are gone."
> > >
> > > -  America in 1984 would have food shortages so severe that steak
> > >   would be $12 a pound, the U.S. unemployment rate would be 27
> > >   percent, and India would be an anarchy because of nationwide
> > >   food riots.
> > >
> > > -  "a minimum of ten million people, most of them children,
> > >   will starve to death during each year of the 1970s. But this is a
> > >   mere handful compared to the numbers that will be starving
> > >   before the end of the century"
> > >
> > >  -  "Before 1985, mankind will enter a genuine age of scarcity .
> > >   in which the accessible supplies of 13 key minerals will be
> > >   facing depletion."
> > >
> > > Tobacco executive (considered lying or using bogus science)
> > >
> > > - "I do not believe that nicotine is addictive"
> > >
> > >
> > >  ------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
> > >
> > >    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >  ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
> >
> >    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
> >
> >
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
>
>    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
>
>


 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl