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: Thomas A Watson who wrote (983593)	11/23/2016 3:31:46 PM
From: Mongo2116	Respond to of 1578138

the last year of class for awhile eh? [fbv]10154961846579238[/fbv]

To: Thomas A Watson who wrote (983593)	11/23/2016 3:53:20 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578138

You didn't? It got some play here. I thought you were one of the ones labeling her a "child molester". Must have been someone else, then. There are no observations that support original C02 conjecture. That is nonsense. The basic mechanism has been known for more than a century. And has been verified experimentally. Adding CO2 to the atmosphere does cause warming. This is indisputable. By measuring the isotope ratios of the carbon, we know that the increase in CO2 concentration has been due to fossil carbon. While it might be possible that the source of that fossil carbon is due to something like vulcanism, there is no evidence that we are in a particularly intense period of volcanic eruptions. Now, what has occurred is that we have mined and burned an increasing amount of fossil fuels over the past few centuries. So that is the likely source. Fact increased CO2 has led to huge increases in food crop yeilds and in places where there are very dry conditions Only if you cherry pick. It is highly dependent on the crop. In some cases, you get a lot of foliage and not much of what is generally consumed. In others, production goes down. In others, the nutritional value goes down. And then there is the little matter that not all crops do well in warmer climates. And then there is the whole issue of shifting rainfall. Restricting the use of fossil fuels reduces the access of the poor to electricity and all the benefits to health and well being that implies. This is bovine fecal matter. Electricity can be generated by methods that don't use fossil fuels. And those methods are not necessarily more expensive. In many cases, it is even cheaper. The world's largest producer of wind energy is the state of Texas. It isn't because carbon fuels, including natural gas and coal, is unavailable here. It is because wind is cheaper in some locations. Not everywhere, but enough to where it makes us number 1. In the world. Now true, 30-40 years ago, alternatives to carbon fuels were more expensive. But that hasn't been true for a while. So there is no 'raping' of the poor going on. Only in your perverted imagination.