The Environmentalist Thread Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: TimF who wrote (17763)	11/27/2007 4:46:00 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) of 36921

and the ways that the spending will increase are understood far better than climate, and nearly locked in. Nonsense. If you want to pull in prior climate on Greenland and think that is significant, I'll simply point out that birthrates and immigration have fluctuated widely in the past as well, and this affects SS solvency dramatically. What makes you so sure that a steady stream of immigrants or renewed higher domestic birthrates will not save SS as well? I can clearly point to the fact that in the past higher growth rates did exist, and SS didn't have the projected problems. If the author had pulled together the best science he could find on Greenlands temps, the melting rates, how they are coupled, and what the best projections are going forward, I'd respect him. He did no such thing. Instead he explicitly used a static number for melt rate and projected it forward. That single point is what I'm calling him a knave for. He deserves it just as surely as anyone discussing SS finances going forward would be a knave if he quoted 2006 balance of payments as justification for projections.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next