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: Wharf Rat who wrote (20788)	6/12/2006 6:50:47 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541180

John posted the link to that a couple of weeks ago and we discussed it. It doesn't address the question of how much of the problem is human caused. It also doesn't give much info on if it's feasible and what it would take to fix it. I'll give it points, though, for directing the search for a cure in what I think is the right direction and away from Kyoto, which is the wrong direction.

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (20788)	6/12/2006 8:08:07 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 541180

Thanks for posting the Easterbrook piece, WR. However, I posted it here sometime back because I expected to draw on it but rather found it was much too superficial. I don't know who Easterbrook is, nor what his credentials are, but I expected the Brookings Institution signature to make certain it was serious and in depth. I was disappointed. There do appear to be three claims in Easterbrook that are widely subscribed to, at least so far as I've read up to this: (1) global warming is taking place, (2) human activity contributes to it, and (3) there are any number of measures, small to large, that could be introduced to address it, most of which don't do economic damage, just rechannel it, but which do require political will.