Simply become a better salesman. If Cassandra had convinced her fellow Trojans to burn the horse as an offering to the gods the story might have a very different ending.

The point of the Cassandra myth is that the gods punished her hubris by making her prophecies absolutely true but unbelievable in every case. It was meant as a reminder to those who think they know the truth (about, e.g., causes) to be more humble and less dogmatic.

It seems to me that there are at least two kinds of people whose goals are diametrically opposed: those who exploit the stupidity and incredulity of others, and those who try to solve others problems. The former are the robber barons, whose wealth often inspires envy and whose lack of ethics inspires scorn. The latter are admired only to the extent they succeed.

If anyone aims to be a problem solver, the priniciple of subsidiarity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity)
is the best antidote to the curse of Cassandra.

@Rob look up the tragedy of the commons. Without some sort of overarching plan, then even if the people are concerned do something, those who aren’t will just step in and fill that gap. Basically if you believe that there is such thing as too much deadly gas in the atmosphere or over-fishing, then there has to be some sort of regulation applied to everyone. Thus taxes not an additional burden, but the cost of not turning the place into a wasteland. To me people saying “Don’t tax me bro” are analogous to companies saying “Making us pay for dumping toxic waste in rivers is unfair”. You’ll have to pay for the true cost of production either in ecological disasters or higher costs to offset it. Live and let live indeed.

But as to the post itself, I can’t help but feel it as terribly ironic. Intentional or not, the tone comes off as rather “woe is me for knowing the Truth, it’s a terrible burden to always be right”. The standard archetype of Greek heroes often had such hubris, that is right until they met their nemesis.

Rob – statistically, odds are that you WILL be in a car accident. Whether that will be today or tomorrow or 5 years from now is open to debate. Also open to debate is the severity of the accident, which further clouds one’s perception of the risk.

Remember, you are safer in a commercial airliner than you are in a car, which is the opposite of what most people believe.

@Rob,
Do I understand you right? You feel nuclear energy is clean? Would you be willing to store the waste in your home?

The only downside I can see is that all your loved ones would get cancer from the exposure?

@Maus That is not the version of the Cassandra story I know. Apollo fell in love with her and gifted her with prophecy, but she spurned him and he tempered it with the added curse. Not sure which Cassandra you are talking about, as many mythological figures are punished for hubris, but Cassandra isn’t one of them.

Jacob, it not so bad to watch Rome burn. Everything in nature is cyclical. Let fools persist in their folly and they may learn one day. If not, sometimes when the old doesn’t completely die, the new just may not happen.

Live and let die.

@Rob Look, even if you don’t ‘believe’ in the Theory of gravity, you’ll still hit the ground when you fall. Also believing that your actions aren’t causing a problem is awfully convenient (I know, it’s an assumption you’re living it up with many modern conviencies, but you are on the internet after all). Are you really looking at it in an unbaised view, or are you only hearing what you want to. No one ever believes that they’re a bad person, we all have ways to rationalize our actions, no matter how bad we think others are for doing the same.

You vastly underestimate the impact humans have had on ecology and climate. We have engineered large parts of this planet to suit our needs and whims. We can good or harm, clear cutting the rainforest, building entire new islands, irrigation, oil spills, genetic engineering, extincition of species, we made a goddamn hole in the ozone layer (tell those CFCs were naturally caused). Both our numbers and technology give us powerful means to shape our planet and climate.

Furthermore, even if you think that what we’re doing doesn’t affect climate that much. Stop and remember that this stuff only really occurs in with what first world countries are doing. Now recall that China and India alone each contain 3-4x the population of the US and are quickly developing. If we’re not making any difference now, do you think ten times that might start to cause a change?

Now, even if I concede the entire point and say all climate change is natural. Why should we accept that? I mean if we knew a volcano was going to explode, would it really be acceptable to just sit back and go, well sucks to be them. Should we not fund levees or offer relief to victims of natural disaster? Similarly shouldn’t we be doing something to protect ourselves and others from climate change that we can see coming.

Finally on nuclear power, I agree with you, it’s a good first step. But uranium ore is finite as well, in fact more so than even oil is. There are estimates that if we used it as our sole source of fuel, all known reserves of it would last about 20 years. So something even more long term than that needs to be done.

@Chad – Stating my belief was a validation of the comment I stated. Don’t get excited, I won’t try to preach to you.

Both sides of the argument are based on theories constructed by evidence presented. So theory is no more than a belief or opinion based on evidence found (which may or may not be fact depending on the variables). So, in theory:), belief is valid in an argument. My guess is that you don’t have a problem with the word (belief) as long as it doesn’t relate to God.

I agree that nuclear power is not perfect. There are issues that need to be resolved and this will take time, as will any alternative. Alternatives to petroleum have to be explored for the primary source of energy. The “popular” alternatives (wind, solar) are a long way from being a viable as the primary source. Also no one source will likely ever be the cure-all solution. It will certainly take a combination of technologies based on application to replace a majority of petroleum and coal uses.

@csdx – I choose to believe in the theory of gravity. I do not choose to believe in the hysteria or magnitude of global warming. There are “facts” on both sides from reputable sources. We all have to use our own minds to decide which side to trust.

I never stated that I was not contributing to problems with the environment. I simply implied that I try to be responsible with my actions.

Let me back up and explain myself.

I do believe we have a negative effect on the environment. I choose not to believe in the hype and commercialism of global warming. I want what is best for myself and my family. I have compassion for others and want all species to thrive, and I’m sure I will be chastised for this, but I will ultimately do what I believe is best for me and my family. Just as most of us will. If I don’t believe in something then what is the logic in supporting it?

My choices are not based on ignorance on the subject. I will continue to educate myself, keep an open mind and make the best decisions.

Environmental issues are important to me. Clean energy, clean manufacturing, responsible development are things I support. I will not, however, crawl into a hole and sign my paycheck over to support legislation that I do not believe in. You cannot spend your way out of anything. It not about the use of my money but the abuse of it. We have also have to consider the longterm economic issues as well.

I do understand that supporting environmental issues takes money and a level of legislation. I disagree that the climate is in any way linked to a % value of the GDP.

Education is the key to any resolution. Frankly, the “the sky is falling” mentality and the eccessive spending surrounding the issue scares people off. Without the support of a large majority of the world, nothing will change. Craming it down our throats is not the way to go about it.

I will continue to voice my opinion at the appropriate times, educate myself, keep an open mind and support politicians that have like ideals as mine.

I might not believe the sky is falling either, but I do think it is wiggling a little funny. Point is, since I believe in the power of compound interest, I think if it ever does get to the point where the sky is falling, it’s going to be far too late.

Can I ask what facts or sources you’ve heard? I honestly don’t mean that as belittling, but it is my understanding that most of the scientific community believes it. I know I’m quoting wikipedia here, but “The finding that the climate has warmed in recent decades and that this warming is likely attributable to human influence has been endorsed by every national science academy that has issued a statement on climate change, including the science academies of all of the major industrialized countries.[22]” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_controversy#Consensus)

I can understand people arguing about whether or not a particular way will be effective in dealing with the problem, and want to make sure they’re what they’re paying for is actually working. But I do think people who insist that there isn’t a problem are the ones hiding out in caves or burying their heads.

@speek – No, I’m having fun writing these posts. Sarcasm is a natural for me so I have been working very hard to remove it from my posts to appeal to a wider audience. However, the “popular posts” seem quite popular judging by the comments. Another thing I have never posted here is more creative writing — I do that too, but I did not figure anyone would be interested in surreal short (very short) stories. I am frustrated that, as the comments also pointed out, most people (not on the blog) actually consider this sound advice.