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: koan who wrote (7448)	4/23/2009 4:03:03 PM
From: Bearcatbob	1 Recommendation Respond to of 86356

Charles, You implied he was hired to form a department to study GW at a MAJOR university. As such he has a vested financial interest in promoting the fraud that I believe GW is. I specifically statee "who knows how much influence money has". Without GW Algore would be a footnote to history. I believe man made GW as a threat to our survival is a complete fraud. When Exxon dared fund research that might counter the fear mongers they were trashed. Yes Charles - I believe GW is a fraud. Additionally I believe the fraud is protected by a wave of political correctness. If it were only an amusing display of "group think" it would be simply entertainment. As it is the nuts are threatening the very economic engine that drives capitalism. And guess what Charles - those that will be hurt the most are those you purport to care the most for. What is happening is a complete economic train wreck in the making. Bob

To: koan who wrote (7448)	4/24/2009 1:51:38 PM
From: Hawkmoon	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

Y'know.. from my perspective, it's not personal and not so much about your son. The entire scientific global warming community is on the take if they are receiving $$$$ to research a biased conclusion (which is what calling it "global warming" is.. BIAS).. "Climate change research center" would MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE and should also include potential global cooling as well. If they specialize in "global warming" then it will prejudice their research to that particular bias, neglecting other climatic influences that should be factored in. You can't very well issue a paper on the potential impact of minimal sunspot activity to create global cooling if your entire research center's focus is on global warming. That's my beef.. Hawk