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 : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (96608)	12/10/2010 10:09:39 AM
From: Jorj X Mckie	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224749

LOL

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (96608)	12/10/2010 10:17:51 AM
From: locogringo	3 Recommendations Respond to of 224749

100 year lows are not significant and neither are 100 year highs. A 100 year low is not even a record low.. I see......(I think I see). So you are telling me that it's insignificant, and never should have even been mentioned? What is significant then, a 101 year low, or a record low for 2 years, or what? If the article said 100 year highs, I would submit that you be chirping a different tune, all over the internet, non-stop.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (96608)	12/10/2010 12:07:52 PM
From: longnshort	6 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224749

snowing here in DC, that hasn't happened on this date in 14,389 years

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (96608)	12/11/2010 8:56:15 AM
From: chartseer	Respond to of 224749

Never let the facts get in the way. comrade chartseer

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (96608)	12/11/2010 9:09:04 AM
From: chartseer	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224749

"Each year Government press releases declare the previous year to be the "hottest year on record." The UN's executive summary on climate change, issued in January 2001, insists that the 20th century was the warmest in the last millennium. The news media distribute these stories and people generally believed them to be true. However, as most climatologists know, these reports generally are founded on ground-based temperature readings, which are misleading. The more meaningful and precise orbiting satellite data for the same period (which are generally not cited by the press) have year after year showed little or no warming. Dr. Patrick Michaels has demonstrated this effect is a common problem with ground- based recording stations, many of which originally were located in predominantly rural areas, but over time have suffered background bias due to urban sprawl and the encroachment of concrete and asphalt ( the "urban heat island effect"). The result has been an upward distortion of increases in ground temperature over time(2). Satellite measurements are not limited in this way, and are accurate to within 0.1° C. They are widely recognized by scientists as the most accurate data available. Significantly, global temperature readings from orbiting satellites show no significant warming in the 18 years they have been continuously recording and returning data (1)." geocraft.com comrade chartseer