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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas A Watson who wrote (528387)	1/23/2004 4:34:13 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"What is never said is that water vapor is the most dramatic and potent greenhouse gas" >>> Might as well say 'anti-greenhouse gas' ceuterus paribus. >>> Higher humidity = more clouds = higher albedo for the Earth (higher reflectivity) so more of the sun's radiation is reflected away... resulting in lower temperatures. >>> The opposite effect, as you point out, is the 'blanket effect' when night time temperatures are warmer because of less radiative cooling into space. >>> And, when you are talking natural albedo... there is little that beats the reflectivity of ICE.

To: Thomas A Watson who wrote (528387)	1/23/2004 5:06:04 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 769670

The main question is whether the situation is dire. I do not think so, I think it is another example of alarmism......

To: Thomas A Watson who wrote (528387)	1/23/2004 11:35:37 PM
From: Krowbar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

< On a very clear day recently al frostbite spoke of global warming and that day was the coolest in fifty years. > Thomas, once again you make an ass out of yourself. Do you understand the concept of averaging the World's temperature over a years time? Last year is now tied for the second warmest ever. Pointing out that a city was very cold or very hot on any given day doesn't mean shit. Water vapor and clouds most certainly are taken into consideration, and the fact that you don't know that only shows your ignorance more. Did you watch Gores presentation, or are you a psychic and already know what was presented. If you have the ability to listen to it objectively, then come back with data to show where he was wrong. I am not interested in you Rush Limbaugh derived opinions. moveon.org Del