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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: POKERSAM who wrote (983860)	11/25/2016 2:15:19 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574098

This five minutes if one looks at the drudge report, it seems that black Friday is having record blowout sales. It this Trumpian optimism or koaning, well extinction comes in 10 years climate change fatalism? Arizona Professor: Forget Climate, Humans “Don’t Have 10 Years” link at wuwt will the wise one speak???

To: POKERSAM who wrote (983860)

11/25/2016 5:35:44 PM

From: koan

Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1574098

As much as I hate to stoop to casting aspersions, that is one of the most ignorant posts I ever read. Anthropogenic global warming is something that is pretty easily knowable for todays scientists. It is like knowing that the earth is round. You want to argue against that one too?

Anthropogenic global warming is pretty much a settled science as far as all the major universities and all of the atmospheric chemistry professors in the world are concerned. It is not taught as theory! When I asked my son-in-law how many of the top atmospheric chemists in the world disagreed with anthropogenic global warming, he said effectively none. None! We know he said.

He said we know. He said when they put satellites up, we were able to confirm everything we believed and now we know.

Talk about not being too bright, what you can't figure out is that the oil companies are spreading propaganda so that they can continue mining polluting carbon fuels and not have to put a bunch of money into protecting the environment.

What you are doing is no different than the shills that insisted that cigarettes were not habit-forming and did not cause cancer. You are being either dumb about this issue, or trying to protect someone and it is hard for me to believe you don't believe it's real. It's too simple of a scientific question. The evidence is too overwhelming.

<<

koan, you are not too bright are you. It is more than just grants. Let's take your son-in law for example. Let's say he accidentally fails to practice confirmation bias and he accidentally looks at the contrary position to AGW. Then low and behold the light comes on and he realizes AGW is a hoax and not supported by actual honest science.
What are his prospects in his chosen field if he says so? So, yes, so called scientist have an ego and a monetary reason for participating in group think.
But more and more scientist and institutions of higher learning are being forced to reevaluate their unscientific and non observable position that AGW is valid. Eventually it will die out and everyone will try to disavow ever believing it.
I actually think it will happen suddenly at some point. Once the dam breaks all of the AGW scientist will be in a mad rush to not be the last scientist kook clinging to a totally debunked belief. It will be like rats fleeing a sinking ship. No one will want to be the last rat.