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: Brumar89 who wrote (14672)	12/5/2009 9:31:47 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

It's true that there is a lot of attribution to GW going on. It's anchoring at its worst. However, the underlying science of GW is sound. One great thing about this debate is we will eventually know the truth in the next 10 or 20 years. I suspect that there will be plenty of evidence by then to prove all of this conclusively to you. What I'm particularly excited about are the satellites we are sending up to measure global carbon sinks and sources. In addition, the satellite being sent to the sun to observe it more closely will be another great source of information. We're going to get enough info to really tighten up all these models and the impacts to the globe in the mean time will continue to make the case for GW even more forcefully. Eventually, even the deniers will no longer be able to put their heads in the sand. So this debate will continue to be academic for awhile yet, but soon enough it will all become very real to everyone.