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: PROLIFE who wrote (16776)	10/10/2007 9:28:27 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

In the end, a climate change skeptic in the States must hope that an American truck driver files such a lawsuit here so that a U.S. judge can make similar determinations. That was an amazing list. If it is an accurate rendition of the court and the govt's findings, it isn't just skeptics that should hope a similar suit finds its way to American courts. In fact, skeptics should hope that such a suit never gets to court. Nevermind, it doesn't really matter.

To: PROLIFE who wrote (16776)	10/11/2007 12:08:29 AM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

Here is a link to the film pack that the British court ordered accompany An Inconvenient Truth. teachernet.gov.uk And here is a core paragraph: An Inconvenient Truth (?AIT?) is a film that has had a big impact. Its aim is to make the science and the arguments about global warming and climate change and its effects accessible to all audiences. It also presents a powerful case in favour of one particular type of political response to climate change. The Film has a huge potential for engaging pupils on a complex subject. There are four central scientific hypotheses which underlie the film: global average temperatures have been rising significantly over the past half century and are likely to continue to rise; this is mainly attributable to man-made emissions of greenhouse gases; if unchecked, this will have significant adverse effects on the world and its populations; and there are measures which individuals and governments can take which will help to reduce climate change or mitigate its effects. All of these hypotheses are regarded as valid by the great majority of scientific opinion worldwide. However, in parts of the film, Gore presents evidence and arguments which do not accord with mainstream scientific opinion. This guidance points out, on a scene by scene basis, the areas where further input will be required from teaching staff. This guidance is designed to help teaching staff encourage their pupils to assess the validity and credibility of different information sources and explore different points of view so as to form their own opinions. And one more: The sceptical view Teaching staff will be aware that a minority of scientists disagree with the central thesis that climate change over the past half-century is mainly attributable to man- made greenhouse gases. However, the High Court has made clear the law does not require teaching staff to adopt a position of neutrality between views which accord with the great majority of scientific opinion and those which do not.