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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (226633)	4/10/2007 10:58:26 AM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Ah, I see you did a bit more Googling than I did.

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (226633)	4/10/2007 11:06:22 AM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

What I find astonishing about global warming science is the incredible amount of work that has gone into tracking the tangents down to the necessary accuracy. Just look at trying to measure sea level in the mm/year range from satellites on a non-spherical, dynamic earth. Human CO2 production is only about 3-4% of the total natural carbon cycle volume, and trying to understand all the carbon cycle processes just to that level, let alone better resolution has been a big challenge. Perhaps Climate Scientists should point out that the CO2 problem is like the US budget deficit: On about the same order vs. GDP per year, but people know how that has added up over the years. Might make it a bit more real for some.