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 (17687)	11/23/2007 5:53:23 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36921

Plus the enviro wackos wouldn't pay up anyway

To: Brumar89 who wrote (17687)	11/23/2007 8:02:18 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36921

Actually he is putting his money where his mouth is. Your own post pointed out he only wins if the AGW forecast is met. No dumbbell. Lindzen wins if it comes in on the low side of the AGW forecast. He only LOOSES if it is ABOVE the mean of the AGW forecast (per IPCC) Put this in a little perspective. Can you imagine ANY of you bashers conceding that AGP is still true even IF the temp stayed FLAT for the next 20 years? What about if it went DOWN 0.2 deg in the next 20 years. LOL! That is the flip side of the way Lindzen is arguing. He's claiming no AGW if it goes up 0.2, and he wont even concede a loss if it gets to 0.4, and above that he wants 2:1 payout in his favor. Geez, what morons. Your are a fool, and I guess I just don't learn not to deal with you. Well, I've learned for a while. Have a nice day!