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 (15612)	12/21/2009 4:35:28 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86355

OK then, if you trust that data, then I'll repost the chart here. Just by eyeballing it you can tell that almost all data points after 1997 are above the 0.0 mean line. So the chart you trust, clearly shows that after 1997 there were upside temperature anomalies for almost all years afterwards. That would indicate global warming to me. In addition, you can see that 2009 is shaping up to be another record as compared to past years. Isn't that obvious to everyone looking at your chart below?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (15612)	12/21/2009 4:46:50 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86355

Here's another interesting chart for you. I got average annual CO2 levels from 1980 onwards from NOAA and superimposed that on the NASA average temperature chart from the same date range. I ran a quick correlation analysis on it and it came out with 83%. Of course, that doesn't indicate correlation, but on these 29 data points, it does say that they are correlated. Data sources: ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_annmean_gl.txt data.giss.nasa.gov chart url: s3.postimage.org