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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ManyMoose who wrote (64376)	5/8/2008 10:51:39 AM
From: DanD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542254

Limited personal observations, yeah, that's the best way to do science. How do your retreating pines corolate with retreating icebergs? Or for that matter, actual temperature measurements, that virtually no one argues against? The chestnut trees in my home county were wiped out. It was from a blight. Killed the pig farming business and turned my uncles into moonshiners, but it had nothing to do with global warming. The argument has moved on, it is no longer about whether the earth is warming, but about what is causing the earth to warm. Dan D.

To: ManyMoose who wrote (64376)	5/9/2008 1:49:55 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542254

I have some theories about global warming formed from observations I made in the field twenty years ago: The northern most occurrence of sugar pine, a species common in southern Oregon and northern California, was retreating. The 70s where fairly cool, although that's more like 30 years ago than 20. But then an effect like trees retreating from their northern range is a slow effect. More generally we've been getting warmer since the end of the little ice age in the 1800s, that doesn't mean every place has necessarily gotten warmer but I believe the vast majority of places have.