SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : FREE AMERICA -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (8175)6/14/2006 12:12:57 PM
From: Oral Roberts  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 14758
 
I am not for pollution, don't get me wrong. I just don't think we should cripple our economy to lower our emissions when it won't make any difference.

Besides, whenever the establishment says you have to believe something, you want people who question the establishment. Or as GLOBAL cooling guru Gray once said, "Consensus science isn't science."



To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (8175)6/15/2006 7:56:23 AM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 14758
 
RE: Glaciers disappearing "on every continent".

First, global warming fanatics rule the debate that most folks hear, so we have been fed a mountain of BS. Second, even if global warming is as bad as claimed (it's not) & it's mainly due to humans (it's not), there is almost nothing that could be done to slow it let alone stop it.

If we did what the environmental kooks want (Koyoto, ET AL), the economic & human consequences would be beyond cataclysmic. And those glaciers would continue to recede (or advance) in spite of our attempts to change things.

Yes, we should take every realistic step to reduce all forms of pollution. We also should insist that the debate about the environment & global warming be reality based, not agenda driven by fanatical activists & scientists who know they would be unemployed (no more grants) if they accurately reported the results of their work (IE - global warming is not a huge threat to mankind).

Is a New Ice Age Under Way?
    the best-measured glacier in North America, the Nisqually 
on Mount Rainier, has been growing since 1931
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=21932262

The Tip of the Iceberg
Message 21261559

THE ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING DOCTRINE
    Geologist can play an important role in these independent 
assessments. Geologic history tells us how climate has
changed naturally at all time scales, from the two "snow-
ball earth" periods in the Precambrian, through the ice
ages in the Ordovician and Carboniferous-Permian, to the
Cretaceous warm period, to the ice-age period we are
living in now, and from the 1500-year climate fluctuations
in the Holocene through the century-scale fluctuations in
the past millennia (of which the present "Modern Warm
Period" is one), to the climate effects of the 11-year
sunspot cycles. Glaciologists can tell the AGW alarmists
that the retreat of some glaciers is not due to AGW They
can point out that many glaciers have been retreating
since the Little Ice Age, while others have been static or
are advancing.
They can point out that many glaciers
started to retreat already in the eighteenth century, long
before any increase in man-made greenhouse gases. For
instance, the Franz Josef Glacier [South Island, New
Zealand] started to retreat in 1750 and has had several
advances since then as well, the last one starting in
1996. Another example is the large Gangotri Glacier in
the Himalayas, which has been retreating since 1780.
http://www.nbr.co.nz/home/column_article.asp?id=14429&cid=18&cname=Opinion