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: Sam who wrote (7519)	4/24/2009 8:21:03 PM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

Basically you seem to cite positive feedbacks when needed to make an argument. But when one needs to explain why the positive feedback process didn't continue once upon a time, well then you cite negative feedbacks which took charge. You're defending the idea that CO2 released by volcanoes once killed 95% of species in some manner or other, presumably global warming. But the warming abated eventually due to negative feedbacks. For that to happen the negative feedback forces must h/b stronger than the positive feedback forces. Or the earth wouldn't have returned to a state allowing abundant life. So why not assume negative feedback associated with increases of CO2 today? The alarmist models all have net positive feedback, you know. Thats why we're running out of time, only have 4 yrs per Hansen, before out of control global warming takes control. redgreenandblue.org So which is it - are the feedbacks from increased CO2 positive on balance or negative on balance? There are both positive and negative feedbacks. But they have to on balance be one or the other. Don't get to pick which based on which assumption is needed for your explanation. ---------------------------- Here's what I think makes sense. Negative feedbacks associated with CO2 increases must outweigh positive ones. Because we know from ice cores CO2 has gone up and down and has followed temperature changes not led them. Sounds like negative feedbacks are more powerful to me.