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: SilentZ who wrote (696634)	2/1/2013 3:13:42 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576742

what bullshit, yeah and they are blaming all the shootings in Chicago on global warming

To: SilentZ who wrote (696634)	2/1/2013 3:34:40 PM
From: combjelly	Respond to of 1576742

That doesn't even take into account droughts and famine This is an often ignored factor. Droughts have been slashing harvest across the globe. It had a huge impact last year, what kept it from being an utter disaster was a hurricane that was fortuitously timed. When you have to have a hurricane to prevent a disaster, well...

To: SilentZ who wrote (696634)	2/1/2013 5:56:21 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576742

Z, this is typical alarmism, not science. No one can prove that deaths due to extremes in local climates wouldn't have happened without CO2 emissions raising the average temperature of the globe by 1-2 degrees Celcius. Computer models can easily be manipulated to show any result you want. Especially when it comes to funding, these models are skewed toward making the most grandiose statement researchers can get away with. When you start blaming every heat wave, cold snap, and the deaths that result from them to "climate change," you can exaggerate your numbers to huge proportions. Like I said, global warming is a religion, not a science. Tenchusatsu

To: SilentZ who wrote (696634)	2/1/2013 6:27:13 PM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576742

1893 : Two Major Hurricanes Hit The US And Killed 4,000 People Posted on February 1, 2013by stevengoddard It has been eight years since the US was hit by a major hurricane. Hurricane expert Barack Obama says that storms are getting stronger, and that none of his subjects in his kingdom are allowed to disagree with him. Hurricane Six Category 3 hurricane The 6th storm of the season, known as the 1893 Sea Islands Hurricane, formed near Cape Verde on August 15. The storm moved generally westward for the first 11 days of its life, during which it strengthened to a Category 3 hurricane. As it approached the Bahamas, it moved more northwestward, paralleling the coast of Florida. The storm hit near Savannah, Georgia and was responsible for the deaths of 2000 people. It moved northeastward, and underwent extratropical transition on August 31. This hurricane was one of four active hurricanes on August 22. Hurricane Ten Category 4 hurricane The 10th storm of the season, known as the Cheniere Caminada Hurricane began on September 27 in the western Caribbean Sea. After hitting the northeastern coast of the Yucatán Peninsula as a Category 2 hurricane, it moved through the Gulf of Mexico. As it approached the southeast coast of Louisiana, it rapidly strengthened to a Category 4 hurricane, and hit land on October 2. It moved through Alabama, Georgia, and the Carolinas before dissipating at sea. This storm was one of the first hurricanes to officially receive a Category 4 designation on the modern Saffir-Simpson scale. It killed 2000 people and caused around $5 million (1893 dollars) in damage. 1893 Atlantic hurricane season – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia stevengoddard.wordpress.com

To: SilentZ who wrote (696634)	2/2/2013 3:38:44 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 1576742

Professor John McAneney, the director of Risk Frontiers: "This whole thing about climate change being responsible for an increase in extreme weather, or natural disasters, is just a fiction really." Climate change signals raining down but proof will take centuries \| The Grenfell Record Professor John McAneney, the director of Risk Frontiers, an independent research group funded mostly by the insurance industry, says that based on a database of natural hazard events in Australia, including some dating back to 1803, "there has been no increase in the frequency of natural hazard events since 1950". But what of the spiralling insurance claims in the wake of hailstorms, floods, cyclones (think Yasi at $1.4 billion) and bushfires ($4 billion for Victoria's Black Saturday firestorms)? "What we can see very clearly is that when this dataset … is corrected for the increases in numbers of buildings at risk and their value, no long term trend remains," Professor McAneney said. ''It is indisputable that the rising toll of natural disasters is due to more people and assets at risk." He said US hurricane modelling to identify a signal climate change is contributing to storm strength suggests it could be a while before the data is definitive. Averaging 18 different climate models, "it's going to take 260 years", he said. "This whole thing about climate change being responsible for an increase in extreme weather, or natural disasters, is just a fiction really." http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2013/02/professor-john-mcaneney-director-of.html