Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (62636)	4/3/2002 4:17:04 PM
From: willcousa	Respond to of 70976

OT - Global Warming The overwhelming number of scientists you refer to are primarily scientists who do not study climate. Among those who do the overwhelming consensus is that we do not have the data to know nor the means to readily gather that data. Think about how much more devastating cold is to the planet as we know it. We were nearly driven off the continent of Europe in the last documented cooling. Can you think of any documented instance of warming that was so devastating? All I am saying is that we are either warming or cooling, have no earthly idea which - in the medium term - and that cooling is much more to be feared than warming. So why would we act to try and affect warming in that case? Extinction is primarily a natural process. Did you know that over 95% of all known species were extinct before man existed?

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (62636)	4/4/2002 9:22:51 PM
From: Fred Levine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

OT OT Jacob- I thought your statement was not of the analytic level that you are capable of. <<The overwhelming consensus of scientists, is that there is global warming, and it has been caused by human-created changes to the atmosphere. The only scientists who say otherwise, are paid shills for the energy industry.<< There is huge honest disagreement about global warming. The first question is whether we are cooling, the second is if we are, is this a transient shift, the third is whether it is a continuing recession of the ice age. Merely 10,000 yrs ago, NYC was covered in ice and 50,000 yrs ago NY was covered in 1000 ft of ice. Should we be concerned with a return of the ice age? Antarctica, where huge claims are being made of melts, has, at the other end, ice growing, and the temperature has actually cooled 2 degrees in the last 20 yrs. In addition, Mars has been getting warmer and I doubt if this is due to fossil fuels. Finally, I have never heard a good explanation of this, why doesn't hydrocarbon emissions block sun heat out rather than trap heat in? During that huge volcanic eruption of carbon-based emissions the earth cooled 8 degrees. What I object to most, is your attacking the motives of those who disagree. I am a scientist who is skeptical about many of the "earth is falling -Chicken Little" hypotheses and global warming is not a closed case. I am not a shill for energy. fred