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: RetiredNow who wrote (6911)	4/4/2009 7:17:13 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 86356

One of the things we all agree on is that during these global ice ages, human populations generally decreased, sometimes dramatically, when they happened.. That's a hypothesis that assumes humans living at the time stayed in their original territory and didn't migrate. The PROVEN reality is that early man migrated from inhospitable regions to where they could obtain food and shelter. In this, they are not much different than other animals in their migratory instincts. Even if you're scenario of global warming ocurred, it would simply mean that areas that are inhospitably cold would become hospitable to lifeforms. Areas that are hot would become too hot and life would migrate as it has throughout the eons. They would find that "narrow band" of conditions that are idea and congregate there, probably killing quite a few of each other in order to dominate the available resources. What you're trying to preserve is a climatic constant as you perceive it now. But in fact, you're standing in front of a climatic train that doesn't halt in its journey between the extremes of hot and cold. Hawk