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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (1707)	9/12/2011 5:51:40 PM
From: Bread Upon The Water	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

Well that is your take on it. Apparently, according to you and Brumar, the GW scientists don't have any trouble with declaring it "settled". I can't go in an evaluate the truth or lack thereof in the science itself. You seem to be able to do it, at least to your satisfaction, even though you are not a climate scientist. AS to the CERN researcher, he has already stated (I've posted it here) that he doesn't feel his cosmic ray results would preclude any global warming data from also showing an effect from human activity--and his results are just preliminary and at this stage inconclusive. What do you think of my proposal, posted to Brumar, as using the percentage of working climate scientists that participated in Climategate as measure of the corruption that may be in GW research?