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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (105498)	9/28/2009 2:28:35 PM
From: CalculatedRisk	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

Off topic: First, there must be a thread for this somewhere on SI - I suggest taking the discussion there. I posted an article earlier that answers your question: nytimes.com "Scientists say the pattern of the last decade — after a precipitous rise in average global temperatures in the 1990s — is a result of cyclical variations in ocean conditions and has no bearing on the long-term warming effects of greenhouse gases building up in the atmosphere. But trying to communicate such scientific nuances to the public — and to policy makers — can be frustrating, they say." Second, the ozone depletion has stopped - and might even be turning the corner. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were banned in the late '70s and it has taken years for the benefits to be seen. Brilliant science - good policy - healthy benefits. We are all winners, except ... ... remember how the opponents said without CFCs we would have no AC in our cars? ROFLOL.