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: steve harris who wrote (314660)	12/9/2006 9:16:51 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572178

"I made the point that temperature changes area causing the increased CO2 emissions. " So the fact that we are emitting several times the total content of the atmospheric CO2 every year by coal burning alone has zero effect?

To: steve harris who wrote (314660)	12/9/2006 3:42:50 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572178

So Steve, what do you have to gain from stopping the US from becoming oil independent? Why are you so vehemently against it?

To: steve harris who wrote (314660)	12/9/2006 3:45:07 PM
From: Taro	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572178

One of the GW experts here explains to us the ice core results. While it's seems to be a fact that the elevated CO2 levels trail warming periods by approx. 800 years, that in his mind still proves those CO2 levels cause global warming, albeit with those specific events occurring hundreds of years later. So assuming this GW expert is on to something - and in my open minded opinion he may well be - what seems to be a current man made CO2 burst may indeed cause elevated temperatures on Earth - albeit hundreds of years from now. Just too bad we all won't live to detect the truth - if that's it. Taro realclimate.org