SI
SI
discoversearch

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: longnshort who wrote (312465)11/26/2006 9:13:32 PM
From: neolib  Respond to of 1572877
 
There are many interesting tidbits to explore. The fact remains that we have well developed science showing that CO2 induces atmospheric temperature change. If at some point we develop some good scientific understanding of how atmospheric temperature change induced by other phenomena in turn drives atmospheric CO2 levels, that will be useful, and possible something to be concerned about. But it is not the issue facing us currently. Currently we know for damn sure that CO2 levels are rising first, and we know why. Of that there is no credible argument. There certainly are people who think that this might not imply that temps will also rise. But it avails you not to point to historical data and say, in this case for some reason I don't understand, temp rose first followed by CO2. If we found ourselves in the condition of rising temps, without rising CO2, but were for some reason concerned about a possible future rise in CO2, then it would be applicable. But we are not per se concerned about a rise in CO2 (aside perhaps from ocean acidity and things like that). We are concerned about a rise in temp.

You should go look at how Cato "experts" tried for so long to dodge the smoking/cancer link, and the sort of arguments they made. Same thing happened there for decades as we are seeing in the global warming debate.



To: longnshort who wrote (312465)11/26/2006 9:22:09 PM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572877
 
"Hence, there are no historical analogues for CO2-induced climate change"

Google iceball Earth.



To: longnshort who wrote (312465)11/26/2006 10:52:07 PM
From: Taro  Respond to of 1572877
 
That's exactly what I said: The correlation between CO2 and the warming cycles during the last 800,000 years as demonstrated by the Antarctic ice core indeed seems to be high. Still, however, nobody has produced any evidence of what leads the other, what is cause and what may be the result. That, meine Damen und Herren, is entirely a matter of what you want to believe, which church you prefer believing in.

Taro


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News