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: Taro who wrote (538378)12/26/2009 7:40:19 PM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (1) of 1577583
 
"That said, there are no f*cking ways to read the CO2 contents or what's more important here the CO2 dx/dt from back then million years ago. "

Well, I grant you that you are able to invent novel physical and chemical properties to feed your positions. Personally, I'd rather believe that such processes are similar to what we have now instead of assuming that they operated differently in the past like you have to for your thesis to work.

The fact of the matter is that to explain certain deposits, CO2 levels had to fall in certain ranges. Likewise temperature. To posit otherwise, you have to take as an assumption that chemistry was operating differently than it does now. Which means you have to make unnecessary assumptions. Sir Occam wouldn't like that.

But, let's ignore that for the moment. For your theories to work, you have to assume that the vast majority of climate scientists have been colluding together to push these ideas for the past decades for reasons that aren't really clear. To the point where they change and/or make up data that is self-consistent and have managed to subvert the peer review process and block everyone else. All without any leaks or even hints of what is going on.

And that is nuts.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext