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 : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (7965)	11/7/2006 8:48:44 AM
From: maceng2	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 36917

The good thing about scientific debate is the conclusions are usually straightforward and clear cut. If someone is producing B/S they are usually uncovered sooner rather then later, and the investigation of the facts throws a big light on the true situation. There could be big red faces on either side of the debate, unless you are used to changing your opinion in the light of new (or revised) data. Christopher Moncktonof the D/T has thrown down the gauntlet in the UK. He has stated his version of the science and the reasoning behind it. I have downloaded his pdf file of references and calculations. Message 22983220 I doubt if there isn't a single climate research scientist in the UK who is not writing a rebuttal right now. If they aren't, they should be. Their jobs won't be worth an empty bottle of Evian if he is proved right.