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 : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (3262)	12/1/2008 11:35:00 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86352

Brumar, every skeptic/denier quotes Richard Lindzen and Roy Spencer and a few others (plus of course those 500 "scientists" that Jim Imhoffe has stashed in his office). But if you actually read the journals and go to the places where climate, the oceans, glaciers, and other relevant areas are studied, you will find very few skeptics. They won't be screaming "The sky is falling, the sky is falling," but they will, for some reason, accept the physics of CO2 and GHGs. Is there consensus about what level of CO2 will be a tipping point? No. Some say 350, some say 450, some put it even higher at 600 or 700 (Mq on SI thinks it can go to around 1500 ppm without deleterious effects, but he admits that he formed his opinions back in the late 80s, and a great deal of research has taken place since then). But it is impossible that adding CO2 to the atmosphere won't cause added warming. That it absorbs heat was established back in 1859, and that fact has been validated and refined numerous times since then. I put this link in an earlier post, I put it here again: aip.org Spencer Weart is a physicist and historian of science who has written extensively on how we came to our current understanding of climate change. His site has many essays that will inform anyone who bothers to read them.