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 : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (3377)	12/6/2008 7:50:47 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86355

in all the science magazines that I read, there seems to be a global consensus among scientists Which makes you vulnerable to media bias, political spin, and the herd effect. Which you probably know. Science isn't a concensus thing. Views tend to form for various reasons and are held as concensus views long past the time they s/b abandoned. Take a look at how long the big bang took to be accepted. How long scientific frauds, including some held for long periods, have taken to be detected. Consider that the inequality of the races was the scientific concensus at one time. As was the desirability of improving the human race via sterilizing the inferior. The bigger burden of proof should be on the side that is demanding that their scientific views by enshined into law remaking our society and economy. The demands by some "scientific" voices that skeptics be silenced and punished should be alarming and make one suspicious that the underlying goal of such folks is the seeking of political power. Put oil firm chiefs on trial, says leading climate change scientist· Testimony to US Congress will also criticise lobbyists · 'Revolutionary' policies needed to tackle crisisEd Pilkington in New York The Guardian, Monday June 23 2008 Article historyJames Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer. ... guardian.co.uk When one side of a "debate" is calling for criminalization of dissent, the end of free speech and thought, the right choice seems obvious to me. There are power seeking would-be tyrants on your side of the debate.