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: Hawkmoon who wrote (36370)	12/10/2012 11:11:43 AM
From: Maurice Winn	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

Hawk, that's like their argument against increasing CO2 increasing the rate of plant growth. The Global Alarmists say "But the other nutrients limit plants, such as water, iron, nitrogen and what have you, so giving more CO2 won't help". In many places that is true. But finding an exception doesn't generally mean more CO2 is not a great plant booster. Greenhouse agriculturalists pay for fuel to burn to heat their glasshouses and enrich the CO2 level because they get a better harvest. They make more money from the increased growth. Out in the wild, plenty of plants are limited by CO2. Give them more, they grow faster. It's the same with iron. When Doomster Alarmists make arguments as they do regarding iron, one can conclude they really are not too bright, or they simply are talking their books, which is hardly scientific. It shows their arguments are generally hopeless. If they can't get such a thing right, why should we think that "hide the decline" "destroy the data" and their other bung arguments ["Christopher Monckton uses an incorrect title"] about CO2 are valid and prove CO2 is a problem. Mqurice

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (36370)	12/10/2012 11:55:36 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

"Good thing you're not my doctor." You could do worse; it took me 5 years to convince my docs they were starving ventilator patients. They were ignoring Starling's Law of the Capillary. Ask yer doc to explain it to you. "acidification, by default, can be eliminated as a cause of phytoplankton depletion." Willfully dumb statement, which ignores actual science.. "Again (and again).. I have told you that Phytoplankton will consume as much CO2 as their supply of other nutrients, sunlight, water, and proper temperatures, permit. If ANY of those elements is lacking, they will not flourish." And, again and again, I have told you the temperature, pH and other elements are no longer optimum, due to changing levels of atmospheric GHG. "Because you're describing symptoms and completely ignoring the cause of the disease." Plankton decrease is just one symptom of a disease called global warming. We know the causes, but we are unwilling to treat them. Other symptoms include elevated temperatures, changes in plant and animal habitats, the spread of plant and animal diseases thinkprogress.org , melting of glaciers, sea level changes,...