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: neolib who wrote (22195)	7/15/2008 2:29:42 AM
From: maceng2	Respond to of 36917

-duplicate-

To: neolib who wrote (22195)	7/15/2008 2:29:42 AM
From: maceng2	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 36917

Thanks for the correction Neolib. For some reason credibility was not the word I wanted to use, and "credibility" is a common word in scientific discussion. I had looked it up "credulous" before I posted it. credulous. dictionary.reference.com There are many words and phrases Watson uses that I wish to challenge... They are not normally used in scientific discussion. They are emotional and incendiary words that are of little or no assistance in understanding scientific matters. ..."bogus" ..."liar" ..."science ignoramus" ..."Falsification" ..."So you cannot comprehend" ..."Anyone who does have a true comprehension of physics can only come to the conclusions I have posted" ..."The overall approximation is meaningless in any explanation of the forever non equilibrium conditions of the Earth's received energy from the sun, and the absorption and reflection of said energy". ??? ..."Off course the dumb consider" all this and more, the constant stream of insults and appeal "to common knowledge" or ones scientific "betters".. These are all the words and phrases of a charlatan, not a real scientist and certainly not an engineer. The discussion does not even rise to where the word "credibility" can be used. The words and phrases above are used only to convince the credulous. Countless thousands of professional scientists don't agree with what Watson asserts is the true understanding of science. Even the most knowledgeable scientist will admit that science is imperfect. There are no "obvious" conclusions to make and every theory and experiment, no matter how imperfect helps us understand the world around us. An open mind is all that's needed.

To: neolib who wrote (22195)	7/15/2008 11:30:55 AM
From: Thomas A Watson	Respond to of 36917

well we are waiting for the designated thread liar neolib to post some real science on anthropogenic C02 global warming. How about a repeat of your credibility arguing and lying about the bogus greenhouse effect. Explain how the 2.5 Experiment by Wood show your past arguments the arguments of the liar and or science ignoramus. And liar boy, my premise has been stated often and over and over, it is that CO2 cannot have any warming effect on the planet (The mass if .04% and lets assume .1 of h20 the absorption is .1 of H20.) beyond it mass percentage times properties in affecting the atmosphere. It could have .01% of the effect of H20. Here a link to the simple so far over you head tsch.de Why do you lie over and over claiming I say "CO2 cannot have any warming effect" neolib is samo samo ear2earfeces.