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: Lane3 who wrote (20792)	6/12/2006 6:58:50 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541183

Maybe my next post did. FWIW, How to be a real sceptic Filed under: Climate Science— gavin @ 8:52 am Scepticism is often discussed in connection with climate change, although the concept is often abused. I therefore thought it might be interesting to go back and see what the epitome of 20th Century sceptics, Bertrand Russell, had to say on the subject. This is extracted from the Introduction to his 'Sceptical Essays' (1928): realclimate.org

To: Lane3 who wrote (20792)	6/12/2006 8:13:12 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541183

It doesn't address the question of how much of the problem is human caused. So far I haven't read anything that does. Moreover, it may well be one of those unknowables. Best I can tell the argument might be over whether it's a small or medium or large effect, rather than whether it can be statistically measured. It's very, very complicated. Gore had some charts that were telling--again, let me recommend you see it--I think there are some negatives about it and would be interested to see if we agree or not. In general, the ones that struck me were items in which you could clearly see the normal cycle nature of x, and then in the recent past the chart goes "off the wall."