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 Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: longnshort who wrote (19802)	1/24/2008 1:06:47 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Respond to of 36921

Now what would a satellite image show about that. How about 100 degrees C range, 29C to -65C. Termperature reading -60C even even in the Gulf Of Mexico all caused by dense clouds. # Eastern North America IR(infra-red: 10.7 µm): Large # image update hourly or half hourly. # weatheroffice.gc.ca weatheroffice.gc.ca • Greenhouse warming has been significantly overestimated. NIPCC has found that the models exaggerate the warming effect of greenhouse gases by ignoring "negative feedback" from — that is, the possible cooling effects of — clouds and water vapor. Taking this into account, greenhouse warming might amount to no more than one-half of 1 degree Celsius by 2100, well within the climate's normal range of ups and downs.

To: longnshort who wrote (19802)	1/26/2008 5:58:47 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36921

Is that Singer, the "smoking doesn't cause cancer" guy, or Singer, "the ozone hole ain't happening" guy, or Singer, the climatologist? === Is ozone depletion of proven significance enough to warrent goverment regulation of CFC's? S.F.Singer argues No for the following reasons- Insufficient experimentation or observation to show that the current downward trend is not due to natural factors, such as the 11year sunspot cycle. Singer does acknowledge that there is sufficient data to show that CFC's are the major cause of ozone depletion (Science, 260) but argues even more strongly that scientist have little certainty about how much ozone is actually being degraded by CFC's. For more info on natural influences see the 'factors influencing ozone concentration' section of the ozone layer tutorial. The roles of aerosols and nitrogen-oxides in reacting with either ozone or stratospheric chlorine are not well understood. Refitting and replacing industrial equipment that can not accept CFC alternatives is estimated at $130 billion in the US alone! Singer strongly argues that the consequences of the CFC ban are a lot more certain than the benefits. 'The unfortunate outcome (if the CFC-ozone link proves false) may be the an unconscionable waste of resources, a loss of public trust, and a real setback for the environmental effort.' nas.nasa.gov === DOOLITTLE: "Well, you're going to hear from one of the scientists today, Dr. Fred SINGER." RIVERS: "Dr. SINGER doesn't publish in peer-reviewed documents." Message 24232855