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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (10718)	2/3/2006 10:55:04 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541864

I don't wish to argue this right now; just too lazy and tired of arguing it. But the connections between fossil fuel emission and global warming is pretty much a given. Indeed. What we don't know, though, is how much of the temperature change is a function of natural activity and how much is human activity. That's the key piece of information. If it's 90% human, then we'd better do something about it and now. If it's 90% natural, then there's no point in hurting ourselves for a marginal mitigation. I used to be a believer. It resonated. It made sense. And everyone seemed to agree. I've become a fence sitter and a bit of a fatalist. That change came when I found myself having to defend my position here on SI and found I couldn't. I could only hold hands and sing kumbaya with the rest of the believers, which is not something I ever want to sink to. The above is a position I can defend. I don't want to argue it either right now, either. The arguments were very helpful to me at the time because I was forced to think it through. (Even managed to help get Tim around to the point of acknowledging human impact, so that was a good thing. <g>) But I've had enough of arguing with believers on both sides. I limit myself now to the occasional caution about the pitfalls of religifying it and politicizing it and calls for more and better science. My concern there is that as the Bush administration has politicized funding for scientific research, they may try to dictate results. I don't worry about that. I spent a lot of years at the EPA. EPA has a lot of professionals, really. There are limits to the influence of an administration on science, particularly an administration that leans in Bush's direction.