THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING Message Board

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.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lane3 who wrote (14250)	6/5/2002 11:59:00 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (2) of 21057

Then why did you argue with me and ask me to prove it? You're still not out of the woods. The effect I described would be microscopic and transient. That small amount of CO2 would soon be absorbed by vegetation. And that H2O would end up as cloud cover or snow- -both of which have a COOLING effect. What has to b shown is a much larger and longer lasting effect. There may be one. That CO2 can accumulate in the atmosphere if enough is produced because lack of CO2 is not the limiting factor in plant growth. Lack of water (on land) or minerals (in the oceans) is. The Kyoto Treaty isn't a problem because we're not signing it. A great many of the liberal ilk advocate just that. In some cases, there motives appear dubious at best.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next