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: J. C. Dithers who wrote (252511)	12/27/2007 11:53:57 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

"So far as I am aware, no one has air in a bottle preserved from centuries ago to evaluate and measure atmospheric conditions. Let alone from eons ago." Wrong again. commondreams.org Besides the air trapped in ice, scientists have also found air trapped in various other substances from previous eons, like amber. There's always some doubt in science, but the VAST majority of scientists believe we're having an impact on the planet. I'll go with them, rather than you politically motivated greedhead right wingnuts. Go ride a dinosaur at your creationism park.

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (252511)	12/28/2007 6:14:15 AM
From: c.hinton	Respond to of 281500

actually they have been studying air trapped in buttons dating from the industrial revolution as well. ps re arctic thaw! [edit]Measurements in 2004 and 2005 In April 2004, the hypothesis that the Gulf Stream is switching off received a boost when a retrospective analysis of U.S. satellite data seemed to show a slowing of the North Atlantic Gyre, the northern swirl of the Gulf Stream.[6] In May 2005, Peter Wadhams reported to The Times about the results of investigations in a submarine under the Arctic ice sheet measuring the giant chimneys of cold dense water, in which the cold dense water normally sinks down to the sea bed and is replaced by warm water, forming one of the engines of the North Atlantic Drift. He and his team found the chimneys to have virtually disappeared. Normally there are seven to twelve giant columns, but Wadhams found only two giant columns, both extremely weak.[7][8] [edit]Bryden measurements reported late 2005 The NewScientist.com news service [9] reported on 30 November 2005 that the National Oceanography Centre in the UK found a 30% reduction in the warm currents that carry water north from the Gulf Stream from the last such measurement in 1992. The authors note that currently the observed changes are "uncomfortably close" to the uncertainties in the measurements. However, the North Atlantic is currently warmer than in the earlier measurements [10]. This suggests that either the circulation is not weakening, or that, even if it is weakening, the weakening is not having the hypothesised cooling effect, or that other factors are able to overwhelm any cooling.[11]

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (252511)	12/28/2007 6:17:33 AM
From: c.hinton	Respond to of 281500

Dithers, you did not say that.....(The mighty ESTABLISHMENT had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the realization that THEY were wrong) .. you said this.... " the scientific establishment often has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into paradigm change. It was true in Galileo's time, and true in Einstein's time." I am not sure why you are claiming otherwise...unless you realized you goofed

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (252511)	12/28/2007 10:28:01 AM
From: Lou Weed	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

<<The mighty ESTABLISHMENT had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the realization that THEY were wrong. Uhh, what you said. I thought that's what I said also.>> No, you said the opposite. "Throughout history, the scientific establishment often has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into paradigm change" No big whoop..... <<These techniques require tangible samples.>> Each proxy has its own errors associated with it but when trends from the many reconstruction methods are overlayed on top of each other a general overall trend can be observed. << "Bobby, have you noticed how much warmer the climate has become since 1980?" If your answer is "yes,">> I couldn't really answer that one with an emphatic yes or no because from 80 to 88 I lived in Ireland, 89 to '04 in WI and the last three in NC. The one place I lived the longest though (WI) has had 8 of its warmest years on record in the last 12 years. Here in NC we've just had the warmest and driest year on record. The people I know in WI that have lived there all their lives have all told me to a person that their winters the last 15 years are nothing like what they had in their childhoods. That's the best answer I can deliver right now..... <<This illustrates my point that people should rely on their own perceptions and intelligence>> To a certain extent. However, none of us are masters of all that is known and you have to rely on the expertise of others in their specific domains. GW has become a hotbed of controversy, combining political ideology with science. Never a good mix so my way of reasoning with it is to go with the majority consensus of the experts in the field. It sounds like you just don't believe that GW exists at all? I think you'll find that most "skeptics" believe that GW is happening but they don't believe that man made emissions are accelerating the dynamic. Therein lies the difference now.