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: Mary Cluney who wrote (20931)	6/14/2006 11:05:31 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541248

If human activity impact global warming, then by definition, it is catastrophic. By definition? What definition? That sentence makes no sense as written. Of course human activity impacts global warming. It has already impacted global warming. Last I checked, there was no catastrophe. If there were a catastrophe, you and I wouldn't have the luxury of sitting home today snug in front of our computers chatting about it. Does it matter if we continue doing business without constraint that it destroys all life on earth or just 50% of life on earth? You are apparently defining "catastrophe" in this context as the destruction of half or more of life on earth. If you are, then you and I are in sync on our definitions so what remains to be determined is whether and when global warming is likely to do that. It's definitely not in 10 or 100 years. Even the global warming zealots aren't predicting that.