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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sea Otter who wrote (96812)	4/22/2009 2:15:02 AM
From: Big Black Swan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

Not so fast, Otter. True, GW-deniers often state GW isn't supported by the scientific world, which is patently not the case. Obviously the scientific consensus is for GW. Those who think it's just a conspiracy by Gore just aren't well-informed, or have some ideological agenda that blinds them. But not every major scientist is in the "consensus". Check this out: nytimes.com Dyson believes in GW and that's it man-made. But he doubts the strength of our models and thinks most scientists are alarmist. He thinks the impact will be tractable, particularly if we invest now. So you see, maybe it isn't so black and white.

To: Sea Otter who wrote (96812)	4/22/2009 2:24:40 AM
From: Hawkmoon	6 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

But to somehow pretend that GW is just a small group of lefties headed by Al Gore as opposed to virtually every credible scientist on the planet... now, THAT's clear denial of the data. You're guilty of the very thing you're accusing others. How old are you? Maybe I'm just biased because I grew up in the '70's when all the hype was over the coming Ice Age. Virtually every "credible" scientist seemed to be pushing that theory as well, or maybe it was just the media.. ;0) Either way, it was spurred by the realization that we were seeing lower temperatures between 1945 and 1970.. That's about a 30 year time frame and now we're nearly 40 years after that. en.wikipedia.org Is there a reason for concern? Of course there is. Just as there's reason for concern over the recent lack of sunspot activity and the potential for another "minimum" that decreases planetary temperatures. Right now I think we're still at the flip of the coin and it's hard to determine whether it will be heads or tails. So I don't have a problem with developing contingency plans to deal with either event. But then again, "dealing" with it might be construed as geo-engineering and of course, that's a "no-no" (unless it involves soil conservation). Hawk

To: Sea Otter who wrote (96812)	4/22/2009 2:25:05 AM
From: mishedlo	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

Deflation Returns To U.K. globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Inquiring minds are reading Deflation returns to Britain for first time since 1960. ... Mish