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 : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (1657)	9/12/2011 11:19:41 AM
From: Jorj X Mckie	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

And I'm saying it's another thing to try and taint one groups entire body of research by the errors of few. this is exactly what the AGW crowd has done to those who do not agree with them. Scientists and lay person alike are painted as anti-science freaks who want to destroy the world. Global warmin "Deniers"....haven't you noticed this tactic being used by the AGW supporters? And you have an economic interest in this issue do you not? If coal mines shut down is your company not out of business? I do have an economic interest in the issue. My product is used in the mining industry in general (not just coal mines). I have installations in iron ore mines, copper mines, trona mines and of course...coal mines. But it is also used in other areas as well. Military, transportation, SmartGrid and other energy applications. I have installations at a couple of natural gas power plants, a wind farm and a solar farm. Because of the UMWA (United Mine Workers of America), business is kinda slow in the coal mines right now (they don't want the system to let management know when the miners are taking a little nap underground), it is a fraction of my business lately. In the past year, I have installed more smart grid applications. Which is considered a green technology. Soooo....Go Green! Go Black!!! I love it all! oh wait, were you trying to dismiss my views because I might be biased because of financial interests? Well then, let's apply the same standards to the pro-AGW climatologists. Don't you think they have a financial interest in AGW being at a fever pitch so more and more grant money goes to their research? Do you really think that they would be getting the funding if AGW was a simple possible concern somewhere out in the future rather than a imminent worldwide disaster?