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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (312438)	11/26/2006 7:13:22 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1572530

you left out Global Normal, I love a fairy tale. My temperature is too hot, it's GW, it's too cold it's GW, it's just right, yep, you got it. It's Global Warming. The brothers Grimm would be proud of you

To: RetiredNow who wrote (312438)	11/26/2006 7:18:46 PM
From: neolib	Respond to of 1572530

Global cooling is caused by the absorption and use of those gases by natural land and sea based ecologies. Er, yes and no. What you are talking about is CO2 historical cycles. Yes I agree. The "global winter" science of the 70's and 80's was dealing with different pollutants which have the effect of cooling by reflecting solar radiation. The scientific speculation of the 70's was indeed correct, but we didn't head into a global winter for two reasons: 1) They didn't know enough about the pollutants which cause warming to understand that they were counteracting the cooling effect, and 2) we have worked quite successfully to eliminate the cooling pollutants. BTW, we did this more because the cooling pollutants cause other more immediate problems like acid rain and city smog. I don't think much of the work on SO2 scrubbers was motivated by climate change. There are serious proposals to start spewing these pollutants into the upper atmosphere to counteract our CO2 pollutants. A race to the bottom sort of argument IMO, so I don't support it, but the science behind it is most likely correct.