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 : Politics of Energy
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Hawkmoon who wrote (6867)4/3/2009 5:22:34 PM
From: RetiredNow  Read Replies (1) of 86356
 
I think we can safely ignore for now, the other GHGs, since although more potent, they are a very small fraction of our atmospheric balance. However, I do not believe that the evidence is pointing to a significant amount of cooling over the next 40-100 years, as you suggest. I haven't seen compelling evidence either way to answer conclusively whether sunspots or CO2 is more impactful to temperature. Maybe they cancel each other out. Maybe CO2 wins. Maybe sunspots win. No one has shown me real evidence with R-squareds proving the point one way or another.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News