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: Wharf Rat who wrote (1521197)	2/10/2025 4:48:02 AM
From: maceng2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572965

If China wants to lead the Green Revolution that is fine. I am sure other countries in Europe, the USA, indeed everywhere else, will be happy with parity FF's vs Renewables with the powerhouse manufacturing country China. Others being Japan, South Korea, as per link. Top 10 Manufacturing Countries in 2024 \| Safeguard Global It's OK to play stupid here until that happens. Then the globe, Planet Earth, is in a position to reduce CO2 if it wishes. Frankly, we all know we are going into the next Ice Age, so I am not so sure we want to pull back on the CO2 in a hurry. The Planet Earth just needs a competent crew, it already has a captain. Religious people will know what I am talking about here. They don't have to be Christians, but real Christians count themselves as "competent crew". Brits too. It ain't just the money that is important. In 1833, Britain spent £20 million, or 40% of its national budget, to buy freedom for all slaves in the Empire. The amount of money borrowed for the Slavery Abolition Act was so large that it wasn't paid off until 2015. Which means that many living British citizens paid to end… pic.twitter.com/hloCHYUqV2 — Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) February 8, 2025 Regarding CO2 etc, we need to do some more data collection, lose the "we already know it all" attitude, and focus on where we have been slipping up. Plenty of evidence of that. The discussion needs to be opened up, and all scientists allowed to contribute. At the moment if you are not "green" you get fired and or defunded. Discount John Shewchuck, with his knowledge and background, at your peril imho. It was Obama's EPA, which created the Endangerment Finding in 2009, which illegitimately demonized CO2 as a pollutant. https://t.co/fpM4uRMVmv — John Shewchuk (@_ClimateCraze) February 10, 2025 In fact Academia should have two Environment Departments. It seems that important. One pro CO2 and GG's and one Anti CO2 and GG's. Pains should be taken by government and industry that both sides are equally funded and supported, Then we have some science. We will be being scientific... Science does not need to "flood the zone", suppress opinion, or censor publications. It just has to observe, listen, and discuss... Great Barrington Declaration Yeah Simone and Jordan were making a lot of sense here. Science is adversarial. When you go to court, at least in the UK, you don't see the lawyers on either side of the case out to defund and destroy each other. It is a process of discovery. Some it methodical, a lot of it isn't.