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: Bilow who wrote (696034)	1/30/2013 9:41:02 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 1575199

Science moves on and I move with it. Granted, I don't cotton to the psuedo-science you are pushing, but that is hardly a flaw. And no, warm in many parts of the globe does not mean it was global. Many != universal. Check a dictionary. There were also regions that were colder during that era. Excuse me, take the "climate change" thing up with Frank Luntz. Was the phrase "climate change" used before then? Sure. But it wasn't common in the media. Which is the point. The role of forcing and internal dynamics in explaining the “Medieval Climate Anomaly” If you actually read the abstract, you didn't understand it. Because it doesn't contradict what I posted. It just reinforces it. It provides a mechanism for the MWP/MCA. Their model cannot say anything about the position of those currents and they hypothesis it could be a factor in those currents shifting more than usual. And it very well may be a factor. But a factor != the only factor.There is no reason why the effect they mention cannot combine with a weakening of the Gulf stream. A decrease in the downwelling has been measured. ic.ucsc.edu ftp://ftp.ims.uaf.edu/msl692/bryden_etal2005_nature04385.pdf But hey! thanks for playing! Please accept this handsome boxed pencil set as your consolation prize!!