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: maceng2 who wrote (1441162)	2/22/2024 2:21:03 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	1 Recommendation Recommended By maceng2 Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572517

Maceng2, it boggles my mind to see a bunch of scientists conclude that ONE VARIABLE, namely CO2 in the atmosphere (and maybe CH4), is going to lead to the end of life on Earth. And that ONE VARIABLE is only changing by a small percentage, rather than drastically and suddenly. (In other words, CO2 is only "elevated" to 400 PPM, not 5,000 PPM where CO2 becomes a literal health hazard.) The environment is the result of thousands of variables, and I'm not talking about the micro-variables like micr-climates, etc. As for the impact that a CO2 concentration of 400 PPM is having on the environment, so what? Humans are the most adaptable species on the planet. As someone said, humans aren't taking a naturally safe environment and making it unsafe. Instead, it's the exact opposite. We humans are taking a naturally unsafe environment and making it safe. If you don't believe me, ask yourself why people live in Phoenix, AZ and in Anchorage, AK, two places where the environment is rather inhospitable to humanity. Tenchusatsu