Proper public policy should not be the result of ideology, money or politics overriding logic or scientific evidence. Unfortunately that is our current status.
Rather it should emanate from a VARIETY OF ALTERNATIVE OUTCOMES, GIVEN A SPECIFIED SET OF ASSUMPTIONS. THESE ARE NOT PREDICTIONS-THEY ARE POSSIBLE OUTCOMES-FROM THE BEST TO THE WORST.
Evaluating alternative futures should not imply lack of academic rigor-in fact they are more demanding in so many ways.
I have a Ph.D. that may focus primarily on economics and science, but there are jobs to be lost and kingdoms to defend in each discipline.
I am semi-retired and at 61 years of age. In can pretty much say what I believe without economic or career implications. Look at the age, income, Department/Academic rank of Obama's advisors.
AL GORE IS A FAILED POLITICIAN WHO HAS BECOME VERY WEALTHY AS A VENTURE CAPITALIST PROMULGATING A GLOBAL WARMING FARCE. HE IS ENABLING A TOTAL BREAKDOWN IN DEVELOPING AN EFFECTIVE ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY. PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS BEEN SOLD A PHONY BAG OF GOODS AND WE VERY MUCH NEED ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO ANALYSES-WHICH HE HAS ACCESS TO- TO FORMULATE RATIONAL PUBLIC POLICIES.
I BELIEVE THE ABOVE SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO FACILITATE DEBATE. THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT THE USA-FUTURISM INCLUDES BRAZIL, RUSSIA, CHINA, INDIA [THE SO CALLED "BRIC" NATIONS IN ANALYZING THE 21ST CENTURY.
Jeffrey M Doyle, Ph.D.