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 : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (4909)	11/16/2006 5:57:29 PM
From: Jim S	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10087

I was talking more about how the noise about the "ozone hole" went away when the laws regarding freon went into effect, as if we'd solved the problem (if there ever WAS a problem) as soon as the law was passed. Maybe if we pass a law that mandates 20% renewable energy production, that will similarly "solve" the Global Warming "problem?" That is, we don't really do anything of any significance, but we pretend to address a nonexistant problem.

To: TimF who wrote (4909)	11/16/2006 10:38:03 PM
From: Bearcatbob	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10087

Global Warming Due to CO2: IF we accept that humans are creating global warming we have only one realistic tool - nuclear power. IF we accept that global warming is here and now and not in the future then the demographics of the world make GW a done deal. With the growing populations moving up the ladder - then GW is a done deal. Conservation may slow the growth in emissions - but I see no way to reduce them on an absolute basis with population growth without massive use of nuclear power. When I meet a person wrapped up in GW I ask if they believe in nuclear power. If they do not - I dismiss them as political/emotional thinkers with intellectual merit. Bob