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: Win Smith who wrote (182191)	2/20/2006 11:14:24 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Win, it's not so much that I'm happy to go back to dinosaur climatic conditions, than that I'm glad we won't be getting another glaciation, which could be the BIG and FINAL one which reaches the equator from north and south. Imagine a white Earth, due to snow and cloud, with a thin atmosphere, depleted of CO2, and other greenhouse gases. How could it cycle back to a warmer phase? Maybe volcanism would do it. Probably not as volcanoes are trivial in the grand scheme of things though they have been a symptom of the monster effect which has buried most of the carbon = plate tectonics and subduction. It's not that the dinosaurs will come back and eat us if we go back to dinosaur, or even wayyyyy back to carboniferous, climatic conditions. We would eat THEM! I'll check out those links and see if there's anything new. Thanks for the pile of data, albeit very recent. 400,000 years is trivial. We only see recent cycles. That's like seeing day and night cycles on Earth, looking back only 48 hours, and thinking that's all there is to it. We need to consider a whole year to see the full spring, summer, autumn, winter cycle. One could be lulled into a false sense of security by looking only at recent cycles. Imagine thinking Canada is warm by seeing only a few days in summer. Brrrr.... BTW, did you see the latest cool thing? With all the CO2, plants aren't needing as much water, so the world isn't running out of water after all. But wait! Anything is a terrible thing if people do it [Greenie principle] - the extra water will cause extra flooding as ground water levels rise as plants get lazy. Mqurice PS: If people want a space observatory, maybe $ill and Melinda Gates will build it if it's important enough. Plenty of philanthropists will fund such things because they are looking for something good to do with their money that the markets and governments don't do. <The better experiment when it comes to global warming was to be the climate observatory, situated in space at the neutral-gravity point between the Sun and Earth. Called Lagrange 1, or L1, this point is about one million miles from Earth. At L1, with a view of the full disk of the Sun in one direction, and a full sunlit Earth in the opposite, the observatory could continuously monitor Earth's energy balance. It was given a poetic name, Triana, after Rodrigo de Triana, the sailor aboard Christopher Columbus's ship who first sighted the New World. Development began in November 1998 and it was ready for launching three years later. The cost was only about $100 million. For comparison, that is only one-thousandth the cost of the International Space Station, which serves no useful purpose. Before Triana could be launched, however, there was a presidential election. Many of the industries favored by the new Bush White House were not anxious to have the cause of global warming pinned down. The launching was put on hold. >