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 : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (78480)	6/18/2010 7:30:57 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 149317

For the first time, I see this conclusion as a very real possibility. Scientist Predicts Human Extinction In 100 Years Posted on: Thursday, 17 June 2010, 15:25 CDT A professor of microbiology believes that humans will be wiped out in a few decades. Frank Fenner, professor at the Australian National University and the man who helped eradicate smallpox, told The Australian newspaper this week that "Homo sapiens will become extinct, perhaps within 100 years." "A lot of other animals will, too. It's an irreversible situation. I think it's too late. I try not to express that because people are trying to do something, but they keep putting it off." Fenner played a leading role in helping the variola virus that causes smallpox find extinction. He has also received many awards and honors, as well as published hundreds of scientific papers and written or co-written 22 books. Fenner says the real trouble is the population explosion and "unbridled consumption." According to the U.N., the number of Homo sapiens is projected to exceed 6.9 billion this year. Fenner is pessimistic about the outcome of cutting greenhouse gas emissions. "We'll undergo the same fate as the people on Easter Island," he says. "Climate change is just at the very beginning. But we're seeing remarkable changes in the weather already." "The Aborigines showed that without science and the production of carbon dioxide and global warming, they could survive for 40,000 or 50,000 years. But the world can't. The human species is likely to go the same way as many of the species that we've seen disappear." "Mitigation would slow things down a bit, but there are too many people here already." Other scientists share his opinion as well. Stephen Boyden, a colleague of Fenner and a long-time friend, says there is deep pessimism among some ecologists. "Frank may be right, but some of us still harbor the hope that there will come about an awareness of the situation and, as a result, the revolutionary changes necessary to achieve ecological sustainability," Boyden, an immunologist who turned to human ecology later in his career, told The Australian. "That's where Frank and I differ. We're both aware of the seriousness of the situation, but I don't accept that it's necessarily too late. While there's a glimmer of hope, it's worth working to solve the problem. We have the scientific knowledge to do it but we don't have the political will." Fenner, who is now 95-years-old, will open the Healthy Climate, Planet and People symposium at the Australian Academy of Science next week, as part of the AAS Fenner conference series. "As the population keeps growing to seven, eight or nine billion, there will be a lot more wars over food," he says. "The grandchildren of today's generations will face a much more difficult world." --- redorbit.com

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (78480)	6/20/2010 1:26:11 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

Keith Olbermann leaves Daily Kos Keith Olbermann announced Wednesday night that he will cease blogging on the liberal Daily Kos over a comment directed at the MSNBC host’s coverage. Olbermann and some of his MSNBC colleagues surprised their left-leaning fans on Tuesday with eviscerating critiques of President Barack Obama’s Oval Office address on the oil spill spewing off the Gulf Coast. “It was a great speech if you were on another planet for the last 57 days,” Olbermann said of the president’s remarks, echoing similarly negative comments from fellow MSNBC hosts Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow. One commenter on the Daily Kos, where Olbermann has maintained a diary over the years, speculated that the pattern of hosts generally sympathetic to the president bashing the administration was too consistent to be a coincidence. “Can’t verify, of course,” the commenter began, “but a friend in the news biz tells me he got a damaging e-mail from one of his pals at NBC. Something to the effect that their anger was pre-planned because ‘beating up on the president has been good for ratings.’ I haven't checked, but I'm hearing that Olbermann slammed the speech on Twitter before it even started.” Olbermann, incensed by the commenter, later fired off a posted titled “Check, Please” explaining that he won’t be “back” to the site until it stops delving into “conspiracy theories.” “‘Can't verify’... ‘haven't checked’...It can't be verified because it's nonsense, and it wasn't checked because nobody bothered,” Olbermann said before launching into a critique of the blog. “For years, from the Katrina days onward, whenever I stuck my neck out, I usually visited here as the clichéd guy in the desert stopping by the oasis,” he wrote. “I never got universal support, and never expected it, nor wanted it (who wants an automatic ‘Yes’ machine?). But I used to read a lot about how people here would 'always have my back,' and trust me this was of palpable value as I fought opponents external and internal who try to knock me and Rachel off the air, all the time, in ways you can imagine and others you can't.” Olbermann went on to say that he understood if some of his viewers were frustrated to see him criticizing the president but that he would not stand for being accused of doing so just to boost ratings. “To accuse me, after five years of risking what I have to present the truth as I see it, of staging something for effect, is deeply offensive to me and is an indication of what has happened here,” the liberal host wrote. “You want cheerleaders? Hire the Buffalo Jills. You want diaries with conspiracy theories, go nuts. If you want this site the way it was even a year ago, let me know and I'll be back.” Read more: politico.com

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (78480)	6/20/2010 3:31:52 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 149317

The Rise of Nuclear Power The newest nuclear power plant in the U.S. opened nearly 15 years ago, but many more may be coming soon. Right now, nuclear reactors generate 19% of electricity in the U.S., compared with 80% in France, 44% in Sweden, 29% in Japan, and 15% in Canada. In the U.S., 104 reactors are operating in 31 states. Illinois has the most, with 11, followed by Pennsylvania with nine and South Carolina with seven. A 2005 law offering incentives for nuclear-energy companies created a surge of proposals, and President Obama has committed billions in federal loan guarantees to aid construction of new plants. "We're seeing interest in new nuclear plants that we haven't seen in 30 years," says Scott Burnell of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). A new reactor in Tennessee is scheduled to come online by 2013, two more are under construction in Georgia, and the NRC is reviewing applications for another 21 reactors at 17 sites, shown on this map. (Red circles indicate proposed new reactors at or near an existing nuclear power plant; white squares indicate a proposed reactor at a site that has not previously produced nuclear power. Source: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.) Some experts, including Ed Lyman with the Union of Concerned Scientists, note that new reactors create new risk, and that the previously rural areas hosting nuclear plants are now more densely populated. Says Lyman: "The public needs to ensure that emergency planning is adequate." parade.com