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 (1770)	9/14/2011 9:49:50 AM
From: Bread Upon The Water	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 85487

Nadine/Brumar: I wanted to take a day off from the debate and let the verbal dust settle so to speak assess where I/we are in this. I think we may be at a good stopping point as I think both of us need to supply more facts to the argument before it can go forward and the facts that need supplying may be difficult to supply. However, I'm open to continuing it if you think more research on the subject will yield useful information with the amount of time we have available for the research. Here's the main premises of the arguments as I see them and you can adjust them as you see fit. Your arguments for disputing the conclusion/probability/suggestion by GW scientists that the data suggests a link between human activity and warming are: 1. More recent scientific research suggests the modeling data is even weaker than originally thought. 2. Additionally, recent scientific research into the effects of cosmic ray activity on the atmosphere is promising for substantiating that this phenomena may be responsible for warming. 3. Climategate establishes that warming science can't be trusted because: a. IT shows warming scientists have too much of a bias, agenda, emotional, monetary, political interest in the outcome of the debate. b. Even though, presumably, only a few warming scientists participated in Climategate, they are such key players in the warming field that they have the ability to hugely influence all the other climate scientists. 4. Green organizations are using the warming arguments/data to make hugely impractical recommendations for the economy because this is of benefit to them and we couldn't afford to implement these recommendations even if we desired. 5. Left leaning politicians are stifling the debate on warming by charging that it is settled. My arguments in support Global Warming case are: 1. The vast majority of climate scientists feel/conclude/suggest that the warming data is accurate as far as it goes and the probabilities are that it will establish a link between human activity and warming. 2. Additionally, recent scientific research into the effects of cosmic ray activity on the atmosphere is very preliminary in linking any warming activity to it and also, even if it does, will not preclude warming activity to also being linked to human activity. 3. All Climategate establishes is that that were a few bad apples in the scientific community and that this attempt to manipulate data to support their conclusions about warming is not scientifically significant because: a. Science is all about independent research. The vast majority of scientists came to the field to do just that. Therefore, the actions of a few prominent scientists would not sway, deter, influence them to come off what their research reveals. b. The Right is using Climategate to tarnish, discredit, smear, all climate warming scientists because the right does not like the message the conclusions from that research send. 4. Federal Politicians and political appointees under the Bush Administration have attempted to muzzle/harass/taint the research of federal climate scientists because of the political and economic implications of such. 5. The political right is funding a campaign against the global warming data out of both its economic interests agaist green power and its political interests and ties to the business community. OK, I probably didn't get everything, but I think that 's most of it. Where, if any where, do we go from here in a way that would further clarify things? BUTW