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: Brumar89 who wrote (965828)	9/20/2016 10:39:10 AM
From: Brumar89	2 Recommendations Recommended By locogringo PKRBKR Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573921

Salon publishes pic of Arctic penguins as climate indicator: Salon says Arctic penguins are threatened by a 25% increase in Arctic sea ice since 2012. Grandaddy of climate indicators is sick: These images show near-record low 2016 Arctic Sea ice – Salon.com http://realclimatescience.com/2016/09/think-of-the-penguins/ It's worse than we thought. Penguins have become the ultimate Climate Refugees, moving from one end of the globe to the other.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (965828)	9/20/2016 10:51:20 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573921

" coincided with the well-established pause in global warming since the early 2000s. The "well-established pause" is a well-established fiction, created in the imagination of people like you. This graph is behind the times; the anomaly is well off the graph, at 1.2 degrees in Feb., and 0.98 degrees last month. Summarizing Question: Why is there so much preoccupation with atmospheric CO2 concentrations and reducing anthropogenic CO2 emissions when it is well documented in the peer-reviewed scientific literature that the CO2 contribution to the overall greenhouse effect is so weak that it can be easily supplanted by small changes in clouds and water vapor, or natural climate-changing constituents? Because it is well documented in the peer-reviewed scientific literature that the CO2 (and CH4) contribution to the overall greenhouse effect is very strong. Perhaps your author doesn't understand what he's reading.