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.

Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: A.J. Mullen who wrote (7686)	11/4/2006 12:24:50 PM
From: Jon Koplik	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12246

Re : " These glaciers in New Zealand ..." -- Wow ! I didn't know that there were glaciers in New Zealand. Of course, I was also shocked (when I learned a few years ago) that there is apparently some area in the state of Michigan (right here in the U.S.) with massive sand dunes. The Michigan sand dunes are so "good" that you could film "Lawrence of Arabia" right there (and it would look just right, I think). Jon.

To: A.J. Mullen who wrote (7686)	11/4/2006 12:49:49 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12246

Glaciers in NZ have retreated for 10,000 years. We used to be covered in them. Now they grow grapes in Gibbston Valley that was glacial not long ago. gvwines.co.nz The Fox and Franz Josef glaciers continued to retreat right up until recently. 200 years ago they were way down their valleys and maybe into the ocean. I think Milford Sound etc used to be full of ice too. As the ice age ended, huge ice sheets, including in NZ, melted and their last throes are underway. Though Greenland remains buried as does Antarctica and much of the Arctic Circle. But now Fox and Franz Josef are having a bit of a revival. I guess it won't last. Hopefully. Ice sheets are NOT fun for what lives there. The Tasman Glacier has also shrunk greatly and there's now a big lake for recreation behind the terminal moraine. It's quite muddy though, not a pretty lake. If plants are limited by nitrates and phosphates, how come there's so little CO2 in the atmosphere. They seem to have done a good job of stripping it despite the alleged nitrate and phosphate shortage [which I know agricultural plants need to compete with wild plants and keep yields up to commercial quantities]. Also, if they had surplus CO2, they wouldn't need so many leaves or big CO2 collection devices. They wouldn't try to get taller than other plants, to get more sun, to expose more chlorophyll. Notice how in the desert, where the problem is water, not CO2, they are NOT crowding to get taller, with lots of lush leaves. They are cacti, with NO leaves, and careful water conservation. And they are short. No redwoods! No vines climbing to the light. Plants have successfully stripped CO2 to very low levels, despite the alleged shortage of nitrates and phosphates. They have been in war with each other for eons and any that couldn't cope with low CO2 levels died. The plant gene pool is full of low-CO2 types with excellent CO2 scavenging designs. Life is easier for them all now. They can compete on other turf. Such as low nitrate/phosphate principles, nitrogen fixation, iron etc. With more CO2 in the air, plants will succeed where they couldn't, so total coverage of Earth by green will have increased since 100 years ago [except that deserts have probably been winning as plants have moved north and south with the end of the ice age, leaving the hot regions to the Sahara etc]. With desert expansion, reflection of light increases and cooling takes over from the warming by plants, precipitating the next glaciation when the plant cover has shrunk enough. My theory on glaciations is that plant cover expansion and contraction drives them. Mqurice