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: combjelly who wrote (696629)	2/1/2013 2:21:34 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576290

CJ's playing his game of "look i haz dicshinery" as usual ... I didn't know you had a 'dicshinery'. Is that like a dictionary but more special?

To: combjelly who wrote (696629)	2/1/2013 2:24:55 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 1576290

... I think most would agree that the heat waves of 1936 had about zero to do with man-made CO2 (since it preceded significant increases in Co2 since 1950). It was just freaking hot. When it happened in 1936, people treated it as a natural disaster. Today, we would likely treat it as an excuse to shut down the world economy. [ It's the 'Something must be done' syndrome we see working on the gun and big gulp threats. ] Most warming data you see is biased by the fact that it relies on a lot of thermometers that exist today but did not exist in the 1930's. If you limit the official government data set to only thermometers that have existed since at least 1920 you get this picture of us "warming". This last year was historically quite hot, but not unprecedentedly so (again, US data only) coyoteblog.com