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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (49208)	5/1/2004 7:30:46 PM
From: Moominoid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Yes of course they were in the atmosphere and the sun was dimmer so the temperature was lower than it would be (but still up to 10C warmer than today) if we stuck them all back in the atmosphere again. Of course some part was in the mantle, some in comets etc. and that in the mantle was added by volcanos to the atmosphere over time temporarily and then reburied in the crust... But what I don't get is why you want it hot and a high sea level again instead of controling things to be nice and mild. We can or will be able to control the system to avoid an ice age it seems. That's not the same as just releasing all the stored carbon which could turn us into a Venus clone in all likelihood.... So yes I agree with you in principle but disagree with your "policy" proposal. Can you explain why you want it so hot and wet? It doesn't sound good for people for a start....

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (49208)	5/2/2004 2:14:32 AM
From: smolejv@gmx.net	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

H*l Mq, Let me go back to what caused the start of our dialogue (this time;). I will not dig out the original context, just paste in my mind set the way I remember. Your text went something like that:"Universe is just nothing but energy ... That's why water flows downhill and not uphill" or some similar absolute, metaphysical, cosmic non-sequitur. That's why my first, short reaction was "BULL". As for the rest:"The rest is noise", as Prince of Denmark said in a moment of extra-hard desperation. At least on my side. Maybe I turn on (subconsciously, cooperatively) my Tristram Shandy mode on, when trying to bore a tunnel to you (g). And maybe I put on an extra arabesk and hyperbole to be able to retract it all later. Maybe time to smarten up and cut the crap to avoid further "Huh?" reactions (DJ, that means YOU)? Re - really short - greenhouse effect, global warming and coal and methane and and ... That's where we clashed years ago, me quoting from reputable sources like Science etc and you quoting from your BP experience and ... National Enquirer? So I guess one can understand why from then on discussing energy with MQ has not been exactly a topic to look forward to in my case. Except when it's "Universe is just nothing but energy". And then my sympathic system forces a knee-jerk "BULL" reaction. Hey, I'm just a human...