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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Webster Groves who wrote (156470)	9/4/2011 10:45:56 PM
From: Bearcatbob	8 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206085

So Webster - what are we going to do about that would actually work - and not simply make guys like you and Jacob have a feel good experience of intellectual victory - on top of financial ruin? I once worked for a small company with a hands on owner manager. He one time called on of the other managers the best problem finder he ever hired. Unfortunately - he hired the guy to solve problems. You guys are great problem finders - with absolutely no idea of what to do about the problem you think you have found. For instance - the wacko greens in Germany are going to shut down the nukes - yup - that will get the world to CO2 free energy. The whole leftist gig on CO2 is absolutely laughable in its confusion. Bob PS: Hint 2 + 2 is still 4 - there are somethings even emotion cannot change.

To: Webster Groves who wrote (156470)	9/5/2011 7:46:42 AM
From: Salt'n'Peppa	13 Recommendations Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 206085

OT Okay, since it is the long weekend and Big allows a little leeway at such times, one reply only and then I promise to get back to posting about the markets and money-making ideas. Please skip it if this bores you. It only takes a microsecond of your busy Labor Day Monday to hit the "next" button. This really is not boring stuff. It is important to your investments and is important in potentially shaping the world in which you live. I believe in a balanced approach to most problems, the concept of climate change included. "There is nothing wrong with the graph." Webster, I agree with you. The graph looks great and accurately represents the data as measured. I questioned the motivation behind the graph's axes, which clearly has a politically slant to force as large an upslope as visually possible. I also questioned the source of the data. I also questioned the context of the data. Nobody suggested that Mauna Loa was an active volcano. I suggested that the Hawaiian island chain was an active region and therefore the sensor location may not be the best. I also do not deny that atmospheric CO2 levels are likely on the increase "at this time" across the extremely small window of time that all these scientists are looking at. I believe in the "carbon cycle". I believe that CO2 concentrations will reach a maximum, at which point they will begin to drop as carbonates, methyl hydrates, plankton, corals, etc. are formed at an increasing rate once again, locking up excess CO2 and bringing levels down again. This cycle is evident in the geological record. It is cyclic. We won't have to change anything in order for this to precipitate (pun intended). Humans are destructive little pests but it is arrogant to think that our tiny efforts overpower the solar energy flooding the Earth, the gravitational influence of our orbit and the planets in our system. What I do question is the motivation behind the disaster scenarios painted by all these scientists. I question the frame in which they present their data for maximum funding impact. Putting fear into the general population provides "acceptance" for taxpayer funding to flow into these expensive projects, keeps the scientists employed and fuels the information-fear loop. It is all political. I also question whether or not the data is actually anomalous. Nobody knows because the window of data they are looking at is too small. These rapid small time scale changes could be extremely common but nobody knows. You cannot make a good investment decision on a stock based on technical analysis of 20 minutes of trading data. You need a 6 month graph, or a 1-year graph, or a 5-year graph. It is my assertion that this is exactly what climate scientists are trying to do. The global population is increasing at an alarming rate. The third world has discovered the Western way of living (I blame satellite TV and the internet!) and energy usage is way up over time. Nobody denies this. Pollution is a real problem. Nobody denies this. The human imprint on the landscape is a problem. Nobody denies this. In the 80's it was the ozone layer. You don't hear about that any more, do you. In the 90's it was Global Warming but there were periods from 2003-2010 when it actually cooled, so that concept is mostly off the table. Now the "funding du jour" is climate change. Bob is correct. Only the enviro-whackos have a solid plan to "correct" these perceived anomalous graphs and their solution is not viable. True environmentalists seek real-world solutions. They propose a compromise, a way to lessen the human imprint on the Earth, not stamp it out altogether. These are the people I believe in. BWTHDIK, S&P