SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum
GLD 374.33+0.7%Nov 18 4:00 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Maurice Winn who wrote (80472)9/27/2011 10:21:09 PM
From: carranza2  Read Replies (1) of 217862
 
Read this NYT article describing how some UK encyclopedia made an enormous mistake concerning ice losses in Greenland due to AGW. The interesting thing to me was that the NYT soft peddled the easy acceptance of some horribly bad data, i.e., accepting the wholesale proposition that Greenland had lost 15% of its ice rather than one tenth of one percent. The NYT should have inquired instead about the process which lead to such an egregious mistake. One gets the feeling that it was looking desperately for a way to justify such an error, not that the NYT could do so without risking major embarrassment itself. Actually, I am surprised the story was printed. Almost as bad as not understanding why gold is an eternal currency:

nytimes.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News