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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gib Bogle who wrote (61834)	4/13/2005 5:25:34 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

gibbole, What was the name of the presenter? He sounds like a shill for industry. Exxon, among others, has run a FUD campaign for years trying to create uncertainty in the minds of the naive public while the experts at IPCC and at most of the major insurance companies on the planet are in complete agreement that we've been having more severe weather episodes in the past decade than ever before in recorded history. Insurance policies are now reflecting this new reality in areas such as Florida. I'm not an expert in climate, but I do understand the role the industry propaganda plays in distorting public debate on matters of public welfare. *** Re: It seems that there are many myths surrounding the role of CO2 in climate and global temperature. Aside from the basic lack of understanding among the general population, the greatest source of these myths clearly are deceitful managements of companies such as Exxon, Unocal and the coal-burning utilities who regard their profits to be of much higher value than telling the truth or achieving balanced and sustainable economies. A healthy degree of skepticism is always in order when reviewing the deceptions being presented as arguments by industry shills. *** Re: Another very tricky issue is the albedo of the earth - atmospheric warming is very sensitive to this. I agree. In addition to that climate scientists also must consider other factors such as Milankovich Cycles: homepage.montana.edu There is no question that climate science is extraordinarily complex. We devote the most sophisticated supercomputers on the planet to this branch of science. But what I feel is all too prevalent in the U.S. today is faith-based science and pseudo-science being presented by charlatans of various flavors. The Exxon grants are not designed to get at the truth. They are designed to befuddle the public, confuse the argument and aggrandize the wealth of irresponsible corporate organizations that couldn't give a damn about how destructive they are to the environment. I strongly encourage those who are interested in real science and not in industry spin to pay attention to what honest scientists have to say about climate change. And almost universally, honest scientists are in agreement that mankind is fouling its own nest with the cavalier abuse of the atmosphere. The IPCC ipcc.ch has vastly more credibility than any shill with a political agenda in mind.