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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (41854)	5/2/2004 6:39:29 PM
From: gamesmistress	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793626

Well, I'm not a scientist - nor do I play one on SI - but even I know that a single factor, the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, is very unlikely to cause the kind of catastrophic, apocalyptic results Professor King talks about. As the saying goes, if it rained enough in the Sahara you could grow tomatoes. How likely is that to happen? I think the Professor's agenda is to scare the politicians into maintaining or strengthening the emission standards, aided and abetted by this reporter's uncritical writing. For example: "cut the pollution that causes climate change"? Pollution has been proven to affect a lot of things, such as people's difficulty in breathing, but I would like to see a report that PROVES it CAUSES climate change. Also this: "levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere - the main "green- house gas" causing climate change - were already 50 per cent higher than at any time in the past 420,000 years. The last time they were at this level - 379 parts per million - was 60 million years ago during a rapid period of global warming, he said. Levels soared to 1,000 parts per million, causing a massive reduction of life." I would really like to see the data that supports this. Especially the data that goes back 60 million years.