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: Wharf Rat who wrote (844851)	3/24/2015 7:18:53 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573092

Message 29998767

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (844851)	3/24/2015 7:31:26 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573092

The problem is that the rate of increase slowed starting in the 1990s. If you choose the base of the x-axis correctly, it looks as if the growth stopped instead of slowed. And there wasn't good answer at the time, although there was the suspicion that it was going into the oceans because the rate didn't slow at the higher latitudes. But that was too subtle for the deniers. The mechanisms that caused the oceans to heat at a faster rate look to be coming to an end. I hope the deniers are working on their arguments, but I suspect they will just ignore the fact that the rates have changed. Meanwhile, the East Antarctic Ice Sheet is unstable now.