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 : THE WHITE HOUSE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (3050)	3/25/2007 10:18:59 AM
From: Mike McFarland	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25737

You are holding me to a higher standard than you hold yourself. <an intelligent and mature discussion> I went through your posts, and I couldn't make heads nor tails of a few of them. For instance, what was that bit about the Antarctic growing? Let's tackle that before we move on to what happened 65M years ago. Let's hold up a few of your posts to scrutiny. I'm not sure I've said anything that is out in left field, but you--the Antarctic growing?! So here we go... The Antarctic may eventually get bigger--if you mean to say deeper. Snowfall could increase, what you might expect to see with warming. The Antarctic is incredibly cold and dry. But it hasn't happened yet. Hundreds of years from now, if the planet warms up a lot, the Antarctic will still be incredibly cold, but not quite as dry. Since the snow doesn't melt there, the ice cap might get deeper, and perhaps even expand outward. You write... "dummycrats blaming a very natural global phenomenon on human activity" It isn't about the Democrats. It is what climate scientists are saying. Now, certainly, the Democrats will use global warming to rile up their constituency... Among climate scientists there is little disagreement that global warming is primarily anthropogenic, but the debate continues in the popular media and on a policy level. en.wikipedia.org But read on, getting back to my guess that global warming is only half from co2... According to the Stanford Solar Center, at most 25% of recent global temperature variation can be attributed to solar irradiance. You never hear about solar, but 25% is a lot, maybe it is even greater than that! Anyway, now we can return to what happened millions of years ago: Solar irradiance was probably greater at that time, or volcanoes were spewing out a lot of co2, or even more likely both. I am not a climate scientist and I have no agenda here because I do not mind if it warms slightly in Seattle. The primary impact around here, is that we have to ski 1000 feet higher on the hill, which is not a big adjustment. It matters not to me whether I am skiing higher because of a natural cycle, or co2. I still ski. The positions of the continents relative to the poles is also important. Global climate is actually rather complicated. Which means, politicians are likely to be full of crap when they say they know what is going to happen. And on that point, we probably agree.