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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (75723)	12/3/2009 9:39:56 PM
From: Win Smith	1 Recommendation Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 90947

Just out of curiosity, which of those posts do you think constitute "fearmongering" on my part? They're mostly just news stories based on fairly concrete observations. As far as "Bush was right", ok. First blurb I came up with: To build a future of energy security, we must trust in the creative genius of American researchers and entrepreneurs and empower them to pioneer a new generation of clean energy technology. Our security, our prosperity, and our environment all require reducing our dependence on oil. Last year, I asked you to pass legislation to reduce oil consumption over the next decade, and you responded. Together we should take the next steps: Let us fund new technologies that can generate coal power while capturing carbon emissions. Let us increase the use of renewable power and emissions-free nuclear power. Let us continue investing in advanced battery technology and renewable fuels to power the cars and trucks of the future. Let us create a new international clean technology fund, which will help developing nations like India and China make greater use of clean energy sources. And let us complete an international agreement that has the potential to slow, stop, and eventually reverse the growth of greenhouse gases. americanrhetoric.com Was he "fearmongering" there?

To: greenspirit who wrote (75723)	12/4/2009 3:35:30 PM
From: Peter Dierks	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

ROTFL If you read real scientific literature, you'll find that real scientists are always extremely upfront about uncertainties. The global warming literature is all very explicit about it. So, on one side you have the working scientists, doing their work the way scientists always do, publishing with peer review, addressing all criticisms. On the other side you have the chosen few picked up by the conservative "think tanks", "think tanks" which do "research" that exclusively supports their preconceived positions, and the legions of bloviating pundits dedicated to propagating the conservative orthodoxy of the day. ... That's life. Money talks, and one side of the "debate" has most of the money. That pretty much captures it except he has the side confused. On the one side you have have "scientists" working to produce results that fit their preconceived notions on the other you have dedicated researches looking for the truth. On the one side you have people threatening bodily violence against other scientists for having the temerity to question them. On the one side side you have people stalling, and refusing to show their work. Climate alarmists are some of the least informed people I have encountered.