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 : Manmade Global Warming, A hoax? A Scam? or a Doomsday Cult? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Hurst who wrote (2736)	7/13/2011 9:11:03 AM
From: J.B.C.	7 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4326

What a silly, stupid position to hold: "I can't prove my position, but lets do it anyway." The effects of this stupid position: Massive unemployment, millions of deaths in 3rd world countries, but sure lets do it ok? DOLT!

To: Don Hurst who wrote (2736)	7/13/2011 10:55:02 AM
From: Jorj X Mckie	8 Recommendations Respond to of 4326

Why is this obvious choice so hard for you deniers to make and so easy for you deniers to say No, No? I think that it is probably easier for the AGW alarmists to see those who do not believe in or support the AGW position as callous, uncaring and stupid. So let's be clear about what I believe (other people who also do not buy the AGW position may have different conclusions, we are not all cookie cutter copies of each other). I believe that there are a group of AGW "pushers" or evangelists who are essentially charlatans. Deep down, they aren't any more worried about AGW or the environment than the next guy who is just trying to get by on a day to day basis. To them, AGW is a means to an end. That end is their own personal gain. And I believe that they will distort the truth to enhance their gains. That's why it's ok for them to buy mansions on the beach in spite of their public statements that they believe that the ocean is going to rise two meters in the next 100 years. That is why it is ok to them to manipulate and hide data such that they are able to prove their point. That is why they won't share their data and models so that other scientists can verify their results. If they really believed, they would trust their data and methods such that they wouldn't care that other scientists are trying to prove them wrong. And we know that they do care from their own words. I also believe that government entitlements and subsidies based on AGW inspired policies contribute to the overall economic decline that we are seeing. When we have economic hardships like what we are currently experiencing, it is more than just an inconvenience and tightening of the belt for some parts or our population. For some this is a life and death situation. Prolonging the economic downturn and even making it worse is actually killing people. And if you think that traditional jobs and green jobs are fungible, I think you need to look at things a little bit more realistically. A miner in west virginia isn't going to enjoy the benefits of those new wind turbine and solar panel manufacturing jobs. Now, I do believe in energy self sufficiency for a variety of reasons. I do believe that our military's activities in the middle east are a form of subsidy. And where I don't believe that our government should be subsidizing wind and solar, I also believe that it shouldn't be subsidizing oil either. When our government starts interjecting itself in commerce there are many unintended consequences. Obviously military involvement can mean that americans (and others) are going to be dying. Not so obvious is that miners and their families can start to starve. And realistically, increasing energy costs and diminishing our ability to provide consistent power will cause much hardship and will also cause deaths. I believe that the best thing that this country could have right now is a week without coal. Let's shut off the coal powered plants and see how well solar and wind handle the baseload. This country might last a day before it went into a complete cultural meltdown. Do you remember the NYC blackouts in the 70s? Basically, I believe that the little social/scientific experiment that is AGW has costs that are too high to justify when based on sloppy and subjective scientific methods. The pro-AGW crowds' attempts to demonizing and mock the "deniers" only makes them (the pro-AGW crowd) look like religious acolytes rather than people who have reached a decision based on reason.