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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (550998)	2/19/2010 9:48:09 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574854

"Can't prove that extreme weather wouldn't have happened without the extra CO2, can you?" Talk about adding new goal posts... Of course it can't be proven. What can be proven is the frequency of extreme weather events is far higher than it was before. While weather is variable, it usually falls within certain constraints. As chaos theory shows. When it starts to regularly exceed those constraints, that generally signals a change. Now certainly there is more at work than CO2. But that is the only parameter that has been changing by a significant margin. Granted, you can take the position that "I choose to believe that isn't relevant despite the evidence it is", but that isn't particularly rational.