<p>
[quote]
First off, you do have a right to say the N word or any other epithet - there is no right not to be offended. And no, those complaining about PC aren't wanting to call black people the N word (at least, I'm not) - we're complaining about an enforced ideology of conformity (that has been renamed diversity) that is brought upon college campuses by "speech codes."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Refraining from racial slurs is basic common courtesy and part of a civilized society.</p>
<p>"Right, reputable scientists who dare suggest HUMAN induced global warming has not been proven - are now on par with scientists denying evolution."</p>
<p>Yes, pretty much and until they manage to disprove that there are correlations between industrialization and climate change they will remain so. There are "reputable" scientists out there who believe in lots of things. Carl Sagan, a best selling author, astromer and astrobioligst believed that aliens existed and had visited Earth in the past. Is this alone going to convince me that aliens exist and built the pyramids? No. Neither are a couple hundred scientists arguing against a sea of tens of thousands. This isn't like quantum physics here, there isn't a split down the middle in the scientific community on this, there is no schism. It is pretty much accepted among the rest of us (that is the world outside of the CATO Institute) that the debate is over.</p>
<p>And here we have ICrisis demonstrating the "correlation is causation" logical fallacy.</p>
<p>You can't disprove correlation. Every time I leave the house at 3:05PM, it rains. Does my leaving the house cause it to rain?</p>
<p>The following (opening) paragraphs from the 1975 Newsweek cover story article THE COMING ICE AGE</p>
<p>Looks like a "consensus" at that time, also.</p>
<p>BEGIN QUOTE</p>
<p>There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production– with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon. </p>
<p>The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars’ worth of damage in 13 U.S. states.</p>
<p>To scientists, these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world’s weather. The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.” .......</p>
<p>END QUOTE</p>
<p>ICrisis</p>
<p>I've read most of Carl Sagan's books and that he was very intrigued by the possibility of extraterrestrial life, but nowhere have I read that he thought that aliens had visited Earth. Where did you find that?</p>
<p>CITATION X</p>
<p>Newsweek is not a scientific publication. It's a mainstream media publication, and as such its sole goal is to sell as many copies as possible, often hyping and distorting information in the process. If you read the original reports, you will find a good deal of trepidation from scientists concerning the "global cooling," as climatology was a fledgling science in the 1970s. Our understanding of climate has since greatly improved.</p>
<p>PC waters down language, culture, and intelligence. There's a difference between PC and human decency. Pc is about walking on egg shells. Decency is about not calling someone a dirty homo jew or something.</p>
<p>That Time Magazine cover story about GLOBAL WARMING last spring
Lots of hyping and distorting information in that piece - full of half-truths, misleading information, and selected avoidance of unfavorable information - clearly designed to sell magazines</p>
<p>Glad to see you agree</p>
<p>In my experience, and as far as I have understood, Political Correctness is when you say something that you don't really believe in,
e.g.
a) you have no background/scientific knowledge on a specific topic, but still say something you don't know is true just for the sake of conformity/acceptancy;
b) you have deep knowledge on the specific topic, but you don't want to express your views since this might put at stake your job, your reputation, etc.</p>
<p>I define respect when you say something and you mean it.</p>
<p>e.g. You are an employer. You believe in homosexuality and ethnic diversity. You employ a homosexual who has a different ethnicity from yours.
That's respect.</p>
<p>But if you don't believe in homosexuality, and yet express happiness when employing a homosexual only because you have to follow country/corporate policies - that is what I would call PC.</p>
<p>In the business world, it happens very often. I've read that many investment banks have started to support positive discrimination in recruitment just because they are financed/partnered by LGBT societies.</p>
<p>In politics you only need to open your eyes... the most daily examples are like following: the Minister of Culture of my country was caught scolding at classic music right after he had made a speech after a Beethoven concert in which he was praising it.</p>
<p>Again, PC is (from what I know), when you respect (or do as if you respect someone), only because of secondary profitable interests, and not because you truly respect.</p>
<p>Hypocrisy is not very respectful.</p>
<p>CITATION X</p>
<p>Time is not a scientific publication. The media has undoubtedly distorted and hyped the issue of global warming by predicting the imminent end of the world, catastrophic natural disasters, etc.</p>
<p>However, nothing the mainstream media says changes that fact that the debate over global warming for 99% of scientists is over, and that if we don't address climate issues, catastrophic changes are going to happen.</p>
<p>your mind is certainly closed, not much doubt about that</p>
<p>LOL. Nice meaningless ad hominem. So much for the debate.</p>