Carbon tax / agenda 21 here we come….
If you enjoy the content at iBankCoin, please follow us on Twitter
© Copyright 2007-2024 iBankCoin All rights reserved under penalty of bodily harm. DISCLAIMER: This is a personal web site, reflecting the opinions of its author(s). It is not a production of my employer, and it is unaffiliated with any FINRA broker/dealer. Statements on this site do not represent the views or policies of anyone other than myself. The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only, and are not investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities. DATA INFORMATION IS PROVIDED TO THE USERS "AS IS." NEITHER iBankCoin, NOR ITS AFFILIATES, NOR ANY THIRD PARTY DATA PROVIDER MAKE ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND REGARDING THE DATA INFORMATION, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE. Privacy Policy
This shit is actually pretty crazy. As much as I am against global warming alarmists, I’ve yet to see any significant research showing what kind of affect this may have. Still largely an unknown, unless someone can point me in the right direction.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peyDUMcN5aQ
Cronk, these predictions are all based on models, not empirical observations of the present or past.
Also, check out the current Arctic ice levels:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/26/sea-ice-news-volume-3-number-4-nsidc-arctic-sea-ice-extent-touches-the-normal-line/#more-62106
What you read depends on where you read it, I guess.
The last sentence in your linked article could be particularly meaningful when reviewed in light of this one published last week …
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=global-warming-arctic-sea-ice-and-c
Anyway, on this subject at least, the risk of confirmation bias seems, to me, to be a major risk. Both sides of the debate should guard against it.