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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: paul_philp who wrote (92817)	4/12/2003 12:18:02 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I have not seen the study, but do have a couple of comments. First, a longitudinal study is a study of studies. As such, it is dependent on it conclusion on the accuracy of the studies it studies. In other words, crap in, crap out. After having dealt a bit with epidemiology and statistics in lawsuits, I think I can (despite my own lack of technical credentials) safely say that longitudinal studies are probably the least accurate manner in which to prove a point. Secondly, it is undisputed that levels of carbon dioxide have risen since the advent of the Industrial Revolution and that they are now rising at a much higher rate than previously. No one knows how long it takes for increased excess carbon dioxide to be recycled through the biosphere. We do know, however, that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Well see. The whole issue is incredibly complex from a scientific standpoint. I would be very hesitant to draw conclusions from a longitudinal study.

To: paul_philp who wrote (92817)	4/12/2003 1:14:20 PM
From: RealMuLan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Green house effect is not exactly equals global warming, it means extreme weather exchange. Say today could be 75 degree, and tomorrow could be 30 degree. And the last couple of winter has been just like that. I talked with some local people in WI, they told me before the snow in winter did not melt much, and the whole winter there were at least a couple of inches snow on the ground. and now, one foot of snow is usually melted in a couple of days, if not in 1-2 days. Most of the winter season, we do not see much snow on the ground. I think it makes sense, because the ozone layer is damaged, so there is no buffer zone.