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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rambi who wrote (72347)	6/15/2008 2:43:29 PM
From: Steve Lokness	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542490

Rambi; But repeating arguments when there is no absolute truth out there yet to offer- that we can actually prove or agree on- Do you believe in evolution? Do you argue against those who do not? Is the evidence of melting glaciers less convincing than digging up a bone here and there? Steve

To: Rambi who wrote (72347)	6/15/2008 2:51:25 PM
From: quehubo	Respond to of 542490

That is more or less how I see it. I take exception to strident posts asserting the debate is over xxxx, is real. I think the world has much more pressing issues, and energy scarcity is about on top.

To: Rambi who wrote (72347)	6/15/2008 4:27:37 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542490

<<<not that discussion of the topic is fruitless, but that the approach has been. It seems way more focused on proving the other side "wrong" , pulling out lists of experts and then denigrating the "experts" on the other side, or posting articles that present the view of one of the zillion of highly qualified scientists, when an opposing view is right around the next link. >>> From what I can tell, no one on this thread has the science background to make a judgement on this topic. But that doesn't mean a judgement can not be made. The judgement has to be made on the basis of experts in the field. Based on that, there is a clear pov that makes the most sense.