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: Zuiderzon who wrote (104660)	11/21/2009 11:50:06 AM
From: jrhana	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

Some legitimate debate and scrutiny would be worthwhile, of course. Hopefully this will put an end to the religion of global warming where everybody knows its true because everybody says its true. For me the logical conclusion would be that if these guys were so motivated to fudge the data, then other "scientists" were similarly motivated. There was a lot of money and prestige involved. And a lot of ridicule for anyone that disagreed with the orthodoxy of global warming. And Al Gore is certainly making a lot of money on this nytimes.com

To: Zuiderzon who wrote (104660)	11/21/2009 12:12:42 PM
From: arun gera	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

>Unfortunately it looks to me that Mish in this case forgot to be unbiased and jumps at the first indication that points in the direction he wants to believe, using a single dishonest group to discredit the work of many others> It matters if the key research papers used to make policy drew upon the findings of this "dishonest group". Comments by those who has been following the research that IPCC uses would be helpful. In any case, what we have been told about scientific concensus, which Gore keeps talking about, should be reexamined. -Arun