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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Financial Collapse of 2001 Unwinding -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Snowshoe who wrote (4051)	11/26/2019 5:11:26 AM
From: Maurice Winn	2 Recommendations Recommended By 3bar elmatador Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13798

Looks about +5 average. = warmer than half the above normal days. Which means it wasn't warmer than half the above normal days. Being not warmer than half the above normal days is a weird way of measuring temperature. "Above normal" is not defined. Suggest use units of degrees Celsius to measure temperature. Mqurice

To: Snowshoe who wrote (4051)	11/26/2019 9:07:01 AM
From: Horgad	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13798

IMHO: You may be at the right place at the right time. climatedepot.com "The impact of the solar minimum is clear in this image, which shows the temperature difference between 1680, a year at the center of the Maunder Minimum, and 1780, a year of normal solar activity, as calculated by a general circulation model. Deep blue across eastern and central North America and northern Eurasia illustrates where the drop in temperature was the greatest. Nearly all other land areas were also cooler in 1680, as indicated by the varying shades of blue. The few regions that appear to have been warmer in 1680 are Alaska and the eastern Pacific Ocean (left), the North Atlantic Ocean south of Greenland (left of center), and north of Iceland (top center)."