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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: geode00 who wrote (220628)	2/24/2007 2:08:09 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

On Rose he talked about reducing carbon output and he noted that he was for stronger car standards decades ago. Since I believe you to be quite sane but not too bright, I'll be kind to you in return. On Charlie Rose Crichton certainly professed himself in favor of better car standards and less carbon output as generally prudent ideas, not because of global warming. "But should we cost ourselves 500 billion dollars to do these things on a crash course?" he asked rhetorically - the unspoken answer being, of course not. Crichton is a master of weighing his words. He didn't want to be sardonic to Charlie Rose, who is also extremely bright; he wanted to make him reconsider his entrenched CW positions on global warming. Since Charlie Rose ended the interview by proposing another hour show of Michael Crichton vs. some climatoligists, he may have succeeded in budging him a little. Charlie Rose is clearly bright enough to understand that he himself doesn't know enough science to answer the question.