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.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (26486)	12/15/2007 9:28:04 AM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217884

Mq, kindly peer review this: 1.Al Gore is a joke; 2.His movie was a comedy; 3.The Nobel will rank alongside Arafat's in the inappropriate category; the Oscar will rank in the same cabinet of politically inappropriate actions taken by Hollywood as the banning of allegedly 'communist' types during the McCarthy era. 4. The science of anthrogenic global warming is more a religion than a science, one in which the believers ardently believe the proponents because the religion is 'green', intuitively 'correct' but objectively baseless, and politically correct. The latter point is not inconsequential as political correctness serves as a nice substitute for those whose scientific advancement has stopped at the 'social' science level [btw, I marveled at the 'social' science moniker as a student; the oxymorons, irony, etc., were too rich to ignore]. Now, Mq, without wholeheartedly endorsing your particular view because it is as unproven as the currently preferred embodiment, I will opine that it has at least as good a chance at being correct as the views expressed in High Holy Church of PseudoScientific Anthrogenic Global Warming, Pope Al the First presiding. Intuitively, a worthless consideration, I'll admit, it seems to have a lot of possibility. From a scientific standpoint, weather and climate are the single most complex systems [next to an adequate description of consciousness], on which science can expound. Water vapor and methane [mostly produced by bovines and other large animals] are far more effective global warmers than CO2, so much so that I believe that I will start a campaign against cows. The film will be shown in '09. I'll invite you to the post-Oscar party. Down with cows!!

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (26486)	12/15/2007 11:26:41 AM
From: Sea Otter	Respond to of 217884

The term "hoax" was meant ironically. (Although there are certainly some easily-manipulated people in the US who think it is a hoax) And your religious comparison fails. Religions are never based on evidence, whereas GW is and is based on massive evidence and is constantly be checked and rechecked in the scientific community. You don't need to do that with religion. This is a common charge by folks who haven't a clue about science. Really Maurice, all I wanted to establish was the GW has scientific consensus behind it. In your first post you implied the only people who believed it were Al Gore and a couple ignorant Greenspeace activists floating around in Auckland harbor. Now you acknowledge that the scientific community believes in the theory, but you are adverse to "consensus" and so doubt the theory on those grounds. (I suppose you doubt the Heliocentric Theory, the Atomic Theory and the Theory of Gravity as well, given they also have consensus.) But overall that's an improvement in your thinking, and about all I can manage at the moment. Time to take the kids to their soccer games. Plus I've got a busy couple of weeks ahead of me. Meanwhile I'll forward your ideas to the ignorant scientific researchers I know at Stanford, who have all been duped by Al Gore into believing GW nonsense. I'm sure your ideas will cause a stir. If you get a call from Stockholm in the middle of the night, you'll know why.