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: Moominoid who wrote (49274)	5/2/2004 2:10:38 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Moom, I did read the paper previously. I see the greenhouse people are catching up to where I was nearly 20 years ago when I was paid to think about all this stuff. <We now understand that interglacials were not long warm periods... most of the last million plus years has been ice age.... we already began to abolish nature thousands of years ago,> But, it wasn't humans abolishing nature, we just accelerated what was already underway, as I've laboriously explained quite a few times, which was the eons-long [meaning a lot longer ago than when chimps started to stand up on their hind legs and put hats on their heads and declare fire to be invented, let alone the wheel], stripping of carbon from the ecosphere and deposition of it in the mostly permanent grave yards of oil, gas, shale, heavy crudes, coal and limestone. As I've repeated a lot of times, Earth was dying. Fizzling out into ice and carbon deposits. You can see that they were almost permanent graves because they have lain dormant, other than some leaky ones, volcanic activity, erosion and so on, for 100s of millions of years. Which is convenient for people wanting to drive around in SUVs and fly to greenhouse conferences in 747s. Putting Earth back to how it was, before the place cooled off into the ice era, with those all too brief interglacials, seems like a good idea to me. Not that we'll achieve that vast project. At best we'll scratch the surface and I suspect make not much difference really. Maybe we've added 10% of the CO2 to the atmosphere. That's no big deal when levels are at the 200 ppm level, almost plant suffocation level. We should always remember that Earth does not love us. It is indifferent. The world as it was was not designed for us. All we did was survive it [apart from those who didn't, which is 99.9999999% of attempts]. We have to make it how we want it, which is surely not another huge glaciation. Mqurice