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: Brumar89 who wrote (17672)	11/23/2007 11:43:10 AM
From: neolib	Respond to of 36921

You failed to note the difference between where his mouth is and where his money is. Keep drinking the KoolAid. But do note that the guy you think is so great, is in fact not as stupid as you.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (17672)	11/23/2007 12:11:12 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36921

Nothing scandalous about that. He thinks the global average temp in 20 years won't be much different than now. Lets look at this in a little detail just to expose you guys. From the IPCC, 2007 the best estimate for surface temp increases (global average) at the end of 2100 is 1.8-4.0 deg C above the 1980-1990 baseline. Lindzen's bet was over the range of (approx) 2000-2020. Scaling off the graph shown in the link, the temp change in the first few decades of this century is 2 deg C/100 years or 0.4 deg C in 20 years. So what exactly is Lindzen up to in this bet? He will only lose the bet if the global warming is > then the best estimates of the existing models the IPCC reports. And he will only do this if he gets 2:1 odds in his favor. Anyone who thinks Lindzen is a AGW denier, other than for collecting speaking fees, is a moron. See the graph in this link: epa.gov