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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: d[-_-]b who wrote (349407)	9/2/2007 11:16:10 AM
From: steve harris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573439

How stupid can people be to not notice algore is pocketing monies collected from carbon credits his Armageddon snake oil hysteria is selling? I'll give him credit, the guy is a genius when it comes to putting money in his pocket.

To: d[-_-]b who wrote (349407)	9/2/2007 11:48:38 AM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573439

don't help the idiot out, can't he look anything up himself? I bet he was waiting for the gov to do it for him.

To: d[-_-]b who wrote (349407)	9/2/2007 10:38:18 PM
From: denizen48	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573439

So you're an atmospheric physicist with a Ph.D. in reading the world's million year charts? Your pie charts and spreadsheets mean zip to me. Charlatans exist in all fields. Actually, wish someone would send you a pie chart of the scientists in a panic about Global Warming as opposed to those who want to split hairs about whose fault it is, Repugs or Dems. Stick a thermometer where the sun don't shine.

To: d[-_-]b who wrote (349407)	9/3/2007 1:14:16 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573439

Water vapor constitutes Earth's most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95% of Earth's greenhouse effect (4). Interestingly, many "facts and figures' regarding global warming completely ignore the powerful effects of water vapor in the greenhouse system, carelessly (perhaps, deliberately) overstating human impacts as much as 20-fold. Clearly, this information is not rocket science and is readily available to the public. Why then do many scientists not agree with its conclusions?