Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scumbria who wrote (122625)	8/21/2000 4:14:43 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1571806

I didn't understand the question. Could you restate it more verbosely? Scumbria, BTW its ok to say on this thread that Dell will announce shortly that they are buying the 1.5 G Athlon. ted

To: Scumbria who wrote (122625)	8/21/2000 4:24:09 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1571806

OT I originally posted asking (rhetorically) if anyone was around to see that there was open water near the poles 50 million years ago (and to by implication to see that there was none 49 million years ago or any time since. (BTW how big and how far north is this open water?) I was told by you and by someone else that samples of the ice could be taken that would show how it formed and melted over a very long period of time. My question then was could such samples give solid evidence that there was or was not hole in another part of the artic far away from where the sample was taken. The way I phrased the question was "But is it easy to tell a whole melted 10 million years ago, and 2500 miles from where you are taking a core sample" Only a limited number of deep samples are taken. It is quite possible that if a spot of the ice did melt through millions of years ago, it was no where near an area that was sampled. How much can you tell about an area a thousand miles away from where you take samples. Tim