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: Little Joe who wrote (7481)	4/24/2009 2:50:31 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

Little Joe, consensus is not something to be ignored, because it is all about probabilities. We know that multiple different scientific disciplines have found evidence of not just warming, but of human contributions to it. They have formed a consensus, which by definition means the majority believe that humans are the primary cause of warming. That also means the probability is greater than 50% that this is the case. Is there a chance, they are wrong? Absolutely yes, but it is below 50%. Scientists today actually believe that the probability is 90% or higher that humans are the prime cause of warming. That is the consensus. It could be a gloriously comic case of group think, but the probability of that is very low, given the sheer diversity of the folks and motivations weighing in. If you were in Vegas and you were a betting on an outcome and they could give you the answer right after you placed your bet, you'd be a fool to bet against manmade global warming. So that's what we're left with. Probabilities. Science is about probabilities. Rational decision-making is based on scientific probabilities. That is why the momentum is there now to do something about it, instead of waiting until the 90% becomes 100% certitude. The risks are too great to wait according to the consensus.