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 (1566697)	10/20/2025 1:08:35 PM
From: pocotrader	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570275

I read some are coming to Canada, a reverse brain drain

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (1566697)

10/20/2025 1:10:26 PM

From: Maple MAGA

1 Recommendation

Recommended By
longz

Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1570275

Oh no, is the Sky Falling again...

Perhaps consult with koan's son in law over some remedies... or maybe a Rabbi...

To: Snowshoe who wrote (119918)	6/6/2016 9:24:53 PM
From: koan	Read Replies (5) of 217271

What I think is that the feedback loops are beyond our ability to calculate with any confidence. On the one hand you have the melting permafrost and methane hydrates that are going to release tremendous amounts of methane into the atmosphere which you know is 25 times more of a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, at the same time there is going to be tremendous growth in the entire Arctic as it changes from tundra to birch and alder and other shrubs which will sequester CO2.. But everything I've studied about climate change from the real climate scientists says that we are in big trouble. Made that much bigger because so many people refuse to believe what is going on. I consider the climate deniers to be the same mentality as those who said cigarettes did not cause cancer or were addictive. But as mentioned, I have an inside source, my son-in-law, who got his PhD in atmospheric chemistry from UC Irving and has studied climatology intensely for 20 years and is smart as hell and tells me it is real and it is dangerous and they know. Let me put something to you, inasmuch as you have degrees in science and I would guess a good foundation in statistics. Let's say the chances of the atmospheric scientists being correct was only 10%. Would that not be a large enough danger considering the implications that we should be on full red alert?