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: maceng2 who wrote (17755)	11/27/2007 8:41:25 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) of 36917

Parker admits that "there are a lot of things we don't know". But, he adds, that doesn't disprove global warming, or the models. "a lot of things we don't know" ... "doesn't disprove global warming" .... Skepticism is warranted. You're not talking about evidence but politically driven surmise based on models which are at best simplistic approximations of the real world climate. But Michaels has, as ever, a twist. "You can't make a case for a global apocalypse out of a 1.5 °C warming. It destroys the issue. If politics weren't driving this we could all meet on common ground." An excellent point. So the case for "apocalypse" shouldn't be made. Thanks btw for posting a piece which reveals there are more than one "perma sceptic" out there. Face it, there's something wrong when one side of a debate assumes that Harvard trained MIT scientists aren't interested in "real science" if they don't reach the politically correct apocalyptic concluxion.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next