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 (7517)	4/24/2009 5:19:35 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 86356

Here's a question, if there was a positive feedback loop back then, why did it ever stop? We've been through this before. There are both positive and negative feedbacks. And forcings--the events that throw climate out of its stability--don't last forever. Volcanic activity eventually stops, so less new CO2 or methane gets put into the air. The oceans (yes, phytoplanton as well as other chemical and biological factors), new plant and tree life, the soil--these things absorb CO2 over time. Long periods of time. We aren't Venus, which is so hot that water exists only as vapor, not as liquid. There are also plate movements and ocean currents, which can either cool off or warm up the planet depending on what is happening at any given time. You seem to want to pretend that just because CO2 isn't the only factor influencing climate, or just because climate has changed due to non-anthropogenic factors in the past, then the CO2 we are adding to the atmosphere must not be the primary forcing right now. That isn't to say it is the only factor. But it is the new factor that is driving the current change.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (7517)	4/24/2009 9:24:38 PM
From: The Vet	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 86356

Here's a question, if there was a positive feedback loop back then, why did it ever stop? That is the question. I have never seen any GW high priest make any attempt to answer it. The only replies to the question are that it is all to complex for mere mortals to understand, and that we should trust them, the ultimate experts, because they believe and support the "faith" (and the positions, reputations, political support and the money as well, obviously)........ Does anyone else see the parallel with the Inquisition?