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: combjelly who wrote (348588)	8/26/2007 9:12:22 AM
From: Taro	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572713

I know the one from approx 1300 thru 1600 or so. That's when our relatives on Greenland disappeared. Is that the one you're talking about? Taro

To: combjelly who wrote (348588)	8/26/2007 9:19:33 AM
From: Taro	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572713

OK, 1400 thru 1650 more correct. Here some stuff for you to study: CO2 Levels FOLLOW temperature changes Carbon dioxide levels have indeed changed for a number of reasons just as they have though out the earth’s history. One of the prime forces for change has been the sun, which has now been relegated to the back burner. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, the CO2 content of the atmosphere has increased at about .2% per year. However, there is absolutely no proof that CO2 is the main driver of whatever global warming has occurred. As a matter of record it is shown quite clearly by measurements of ice cores dated over 400,000 years that CO2 levels move up or down AFTER the temperature has done so and thus is the result of, not the cause of, any warming. Certainly, if man-made global warming is really going on due to the production of CO2, then it should certainly follow that any temperature increases should be even more obvious in the upper atmosphere. However, any increases in temperature measurements have been detected only at surface stations; satellites have shown practically none at all. ashevilletribune.com But I believe we have been through this discussion before with little to be added and no changes to be expected in what we believe is the correct interpretation of the data. Ted, however, totally ignores same data. Taro