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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (24973)	11/10/2006 4:48:10 PM
From: Gib Bogle	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78410

Whether or not global warming is resulting from human activities, would you prefer the globe to be cooling? The only certain fact is that the global climate is not static.

To: koan who wrote (24973)	11/10/2006 6:43:52 PM
From: Claude Cormier	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78410

Koan, Clearly the climate is changing and people on this planet are one of the causes. But there are many supposedly experts that disagree with the so-called consensus. friendsofscience.org "61 Prominent International Scientists Call For An Open Climate Science Review of Kyoto" and telegraph.co.uk "The Stern report last week predicted dire economic and social effects of unchecked global warming. In what many will see as a highly controversial polemic, Christopher Monckton disputes the 'facts' of this impending apocalypse and accuses the UN and its scientists of distorting the truth" I mean..I can read these contrarians articles week after week. Who should we believe? Nobody dispute global warming. But what is the real cause and can we really do something about it? WHat are you gonna tell the Chinese and Indians who want are way of life.

To: koan who wrote (24973)	11/10/2006 7:57:29 PM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 78410

I think we need more impartial an opinion on the subject than third hand information about someone's views, no matter their accreditation. Some scientists say this, some say that. I know triple PHd's whose avocation is modeling climate change and they don't agree at all that the problem is clearly man made. Nor do they agree that "most scientists agree". The statistics of who agrees on what must yield only to a study, not an anecdote. What is clear is that the mechanism of climate change due to greenhouse gases increase in the amounts so represented by human contribution is not easily tied to the actual temperature rise. Fess up, what a lot of knee jerk scientist say is not the truth. 3% of CO2 is man made. What the scientist would have you believe, is that if we double that contribution to 6%, then there will be major heat increase. They base this on 100 years of badly collected data, which shows in log scale a meagre 1 degree celsius rise in earth temperature. Despite the correlation with the rise in CO2 emissions, many excursions in the past have surpassed this rise by an order in magnitude without any corresponding known rise in CO2. So they tell you there is a correlation today, but when there is none, they throw up their hands? Sea levels were much higher in 525 and 900 AD. What caused that? What caused they mini ice age of the 1300's? Nobody knows. Admit that. Did CO2 get sucked out of the atmosphere to cause the last 3 ice ages? Did you know that the summers must cool slightly and the winters warm overall to cause an ice age? What happens to the average temperature then? Warmer or colder overall? Guess what. It's warmer. Do the math. The same scientists thought Marilyn Vos Savant was numerically illiterate when she propounded that the Monty Hall problem probability of a goat or cadillac changed when the game show host opened one door. She was jeered at by 10,000 academics. She was right. The academics were wrong. 10,000 more scientists were wrong about DDT harming the environment, and 10,000 scientists were wrong about agent orange being harmless. I would say it is a rough rule that the more scientists concur the wronger they are. They laughed at Oliver Heavyside, and they laughed at Rachel Carson. They were right, the knee jerkers were wrong. I am not saying CO2 cannot cause global warming. I say with confidence that they do not know it does. I am absolutely sure that Jet Contrails cause global warming. 9-11 proved they do. The data is in. The grand experiment is done. But CO2 at 3% of the total CO2? dunno. dunno.