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: Wharf Rat who wrote (10370)	3/14/2007 12:29:21 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

Pelosi Reveals Who's Who On Global Warming Panel Monday, March 12, 2007; Page A11 The best-kept secret on the Hill -- the full membership of the new committee on global warming -- is no longer secret. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has announced the 15 members of the committee, formally known as the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. Pelosi's decision to create the committee initially sparked a turf war. Many saw it as a way to diminish the influence of veteran lawmakers, such as Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John D. Dingell (D-Mich.), who in the past guarded the interests of the big U.S. automakers from his state by opposing higher fuel-efficiency standards. Pelosi said that the committee would be designed to raise the visibility of energy and climate-change issues and that it would not have legislative jurisdiction. "Global warming and energy independence are urgent issues that have profound implications for our nation's economic competitiveness, natural security, environmental quality and public health," Pelosi said in announcing the panel's members Friday. They are: Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), who will chair the committee Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) John B. Larson (D-Conn.) Hilda L. Solis (D-Calif.) Stephanie Herseth (D-S.D.) Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.) John Hall (D-N.Y.) Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.) F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), the ranking minority member John Shadegg (R-Ariz.) Greg Walden (R-Ore.) John Sullivan (R-Okla.) Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) Candice S. Miller (R-Mich.) washingtonpost.com

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (10370)	3/14/2007 3:59:17 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

100 years = 30cm = up to my knees. I think I should be able to walk faster uphill than the tide rises [even as age overtakes me and I'm reduced to a walking stick]. <Sea levels, rising at 1 millimetre a year before the industrial revolution, are now rising by 3 millimetres a year because of a combination of global warming, polar ice-melting and long natural cycles of sea level change. > Looks like sea level rise is nothing to worry about, though I advise moving uphill NOW because when a tsunami hits, people will NOT be worried about 30cm in 100 years. They'll be worried about 30 metres right NOW. Forget about Global Warming sea level rise which is trivial and very uncertain [being based on nothing but a flimsy theory which I think is back to front] and worry about bolide impact which is not a theory, it's a certitude. The only question is when. There is nothing to say that tomorrow will not see the big news. Best to deal with imminent reality than theoretical possibilities which even if true, are trivial. My bet is sea level fall, and quickly, as reglaciation takes over. You only need to see the eons-long depletion of atmospheric CO2 and arrival of ice age to see that we are in trouble. If we can get back to 1000 ppm, we might be out of the woods, in the short term, but I don't fancy our chances of getting to that level. There is too much working against us replenishing the atmosphere with CO2. Mqurice