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 : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (50600)	5/2/2014 1:31:23 PM
From: Land Shark	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

The 1 who rejected it is a God Fearing True American Patriot, the rest are Godless Commies.

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (50600)	5/2/2014 1:49:32 PM
From: Hawkmoon	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

Sure... Oregon Petition. LMAO. Laugh all you want, bu the list is made up of some very prestigious individuals. As of just last year, there apparently wasn't 97% consensus on climate sensitivity.. Apparently there was such a large amount of disagreement that the IPCC removed the link that Anthony Watt's pointed to.. wattsupwiththat.com And your so called "consensus", was torn apart here.. americanthinker.com So you're actually claiming something that doesn't even exist.. and even if it did, consensus is NOT science. Scientists have had a consensus on all kinds of things that were later proven to be utterly wrong. Scientific Methodology WELCOMES transparency and debate in order to insure that we aren't left with "junk science" that winds up getting obliterated by reality later on. They way YOUR scientists seem to be working is tantamount to declaring the Sun orbited the Earth crucifying or ex-communicating anyone who disagrees.. Doesn't change the FACT that the Earth was not the center of the universe.. but that was what the consensus was for centuries.. Hawk