SI
SI
discoversearch

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
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Ali Chen who wrote (329588)3/20/2007 2:43:16 PM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (2) of 1575020
 
"However, these studies are in overwhelming agreement that CO2 variations consistently _lag_ the temperatures by 1200+-700 years. Therefore, it must be quite obvious that the above hypothesis about the root _cause_ of global warming is invalid."

Invalid logical inference. Sure, in the case when some entity isn't pouring billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, you have a point. But the game is a bit different at the moment.

Ok, since you are going down this road, I will ask you the same question I asked Taro. Are you claiming that CO2 doesn't absorb in the infrared? Or, conversely, are you claiming that the greenhouse effect doesn't work?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News