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: maceng2 who wrote (20224)	2/10/2008 10:37:46 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

Ahh, more anti-intellectual name calling. Once again, no analysis, zero, nada, not one ioto, zip, disputing the findings or data. Just heresay swarmy inuendo and smear mongering. Nice, did you just jump off the Billary buss? :-)

To: maceng2 who wrote (20224)	2/11/2008 1:52:44 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

Well pearly, if by all physics laws, all properties of matter I know they clearly show that CO2 has no property to cause or drive global warming, then logically no generator of CO2, man or nature drive global warming, Logically the link between the burning of fossil fuels and global warming is a myth.” That is simply logic. now pearly and neoliar have not presented any explanation of how CO2, what mystical properties of CO2 cause global warming. I have posted the OISM's explanation of what CO2, AKA al gore religious zealots say is the mystical properties of CO2 that cause global warming. So what is the logic that call the OISM and Seitz dingbats? I thought you were above the lying and character assassination of neolib the neoliar. Can you see that is all there is in the logic of your post and it's arguments. think of brownian motion and then consider what happens when the energy of a photon is absorbed by a CO2 molecule. Where does the energy go and what happens to the molecules in the local area. think about UV, when it is absorbed by a molecule in a human body it shatters something. If there are enough photons it destroys so much that cells die. or does sunburn not exist. And skin cancer is also a myth. If one knows the properties of photons one knows the energy in a photon of UV is orders or magnitude larger than the eneryg in the infrared wavelengths absorbed by CO2. How is it the same and how is it different?