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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (14739)	11/13/1998 2:08:00 AM
From: Charles Hughes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

>>> Charles, I may not know what I'm talking about, but at least I'm not afraid to challenge my assumptions. Well, lets see you do that then. >>> So far the left's position on this thread has been pretty weak at best. So far the right on this thread this month have had 'loser' written all over them. Enjoying the circus in Washington this week? Who will you want for the new speaker, whip, and so forth. Have fun during the elections? Hey by the way your petition is an Internet joke. Don't tell me you believe it. It is an embarrassment like the Computer Scientists Association that supposedly was supporting MSFT in their problems. They got wide coverage in the media until they claimed to have 2.5 million members, a number exceeding the total full time programmers in the country, let alone 'computer scientists.' Programmers on the internet picked up on that, and the press got the picture from them, and started actually investigating their source (for a change.) Then their web site turned out to have something to do with Lyndon LaRouche. If you have any interest in environmental science, I suggest the pages of "Science", published by the AAAS, to you. Myself, I also got my opinions from studying biology and chemistry and spending time working as a water chemist doing environmental studies and inspections for a state Department of Environmental Quality. I was just a technician, doing the grunt work of science, and for just a few years, but I think I at least know what to read and who to rely on, aside from what I collide with on the internet. You, on the other hand, seem to have no knowledge of your own on the subject. I suggest giving up. Perhaps this is just a way to divert the debate from all the losing strategies the repubs have been employing lately, though, eh? Why aren't the press more alarmed about glabal warming? They think its another one of their own disaster stories, is why, like killer bees. This comes from letting weathermen, communications grads, and sports reporters become anchormen. Cheers, Chaz

To: greenspirit who wrote (14739)	11/13/1998 10:09:00 AM
From: jbe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

I believe it was jbe who challenged the credibility of these scientists. I did no such thing, Michael. If you will recall, I was responding to your insistence that the press ignored Dr. Singer and his petition. First, I said that this might not after all be the case. Then I added: And if it should turn out that Dr. Singer is indeed not taken seriously by the media, that is probably because he is not taken seriously by his peers -- the top scientists in his field. A good science reporter is not just going to paraphrase a news release; he/she will check it out with other sources. And the other sources are other scientists. Then the question would be: why don't his peers take him seriously? Professional jealousy? Competition for grant money? Profound scientific disagreement? Suspicion of his close ties with polluting businesses? There can be any number of reasons. But I would suggest that the least likely reason is that the other scientists are "liberals". Politics and science do not, or at least should not, mix. As for the 17,000 scientists who signed the petition, only 2/3 of them have advanced degrees. [This is specifically stated on the site you posted.] And who are they? I don't know. Do you? Are they better qualified than the scientists with whom they disagree? #reply-6387093 And, in that same post (as in earlier ones), I was very careful to point out that I do not know enough about the issue of global warming to have an informed "position" on it myself: I repeat, that I am not an expert on global warming; I am not even a scientist; I have never followed the debate that closely. I just skim the newspaper, like everyone else. And incidentally, I later found a site that indicates to me that the major objections to Dr. Singer do indeed seem to be based on his ties with industry. (Does not mean they are right, of course.) ozone.org I now bow out of this "argument", and would like to repeat a question that I posed several days ago: To David and Thread: Is there any subject we can discuss on this thread that will not turn into an ideological hit-and-run guerrilla war? If so, looking for suggestions... jbe

To: greenspirit who wrote (14739)	11/13/1998 1:42:00 PM
From: Les H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Flatulence and Global Warming: Why Everyone Shouldn't Give a Fart \|> SYDNEY, Australia (Reuter) - Australian scientists are \|> testing an anti-flatulence compound for livestock that could \|> take the wind out of a proposed greenhouse gas emission tax. \|> Every year the nation's 24 million cattle and 150 million \|> sheep produce over two million tons of methane, a greenhouse gas \|> believed responsible for possible global warming. \|> The Australian government is considering taxing animal \|> flatulence as part of a proposal to cut greenhouse gas emissions \|> by 20 percent by 2005. \|> But scientist Chris May, from the animal health division of \|> the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization \|> (CSIRO), has found a non-toxic compound, an antimethanogen, that suppresses methane production. \|> Not only does the compound help the atmosphere, but it also \|> benefited the animals in trials, May said in a statement \|> Tuesday. \|> ''Live weight gains in cattle on high roughage diets have \|> increased by up to 20 percent,'' May said. \|> Trials are now being carried out to see if the compound can \|> benefit sheep and the nation's wool industry. \|> Australia is among the world's five highest per-capita \|> producers of greenhouse gases, according to the first national \|> greenhouse gas inventory released in September.