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 : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (32500)	2/20/2011 2:27:22 PM
From: Land Shark	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 36917

>"in general" Let me explain what that means to you. Not all extremes are attributable, but probably most ARE. There's no general suffering of the consensus here, nor is there a breakdown in the science. I know you want 100% certainty that all weather events can be linked to AGW with incontrovertible evidence, but that's not the state of the science. Life is full of uncertainty. For instance, If you popped 5000 dramamine pills, there's some probability that you would die and that it would be linked to the lethal dosage. The LD 50 of Dramamine in Rats is 500 mg/kg. That means 50% of the rats would die if they got this dosage. Now you would probably point to God's Will; that He decided that 50% of the rats would die; that the others would survive and that it would have nothing to do with the drug. Common sense would tell otherwise. Common sense tells that the alarming increase in the rate of extreme weather events would be linkable to say AGW. Most climate scientists are of this school. I don't ascribe to the God's Will faith, nor do I ascribe to the "it ain't happening" sect.