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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (260858)	4/7/2008 3:32:30 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

If your only response to accredited, serious critics is to brand them somehow as equal to tobacco company apologists, LOL, you are clueless. You can read all about the accredited, serious critics here (even a past President of the National Academy of Science, LOL!) and exactly how they are linked to both AGW denial and tobacco apologetics. I'm not the one making up crap. en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org If after reading the above you can't figure out why the scientific community ignores these idiots, that is your problem. Perhaps a political comparison will enlighten you, since your science is so weak. Claiming that the current climate change is driven by Cosmic Rays rather than CO2 is roughly equivalent to the claim that Israel was behind 9/11 rather than Muslims. Both conjectures have some following (mostly nutcases), and both conjectures have some supporting evidence. However, the evidence pales in comparison with the excellent evidence for the consensus theory in both cases.