• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Climate predictions and hard data don't mix

TheMailMan78

Big Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Messages
22,599 (3.68/day)
Location
'Merica. The Great SOUTH!
System Name TheMailbox 5.0 / The Mailbox 4.5
Processor RYZEN 1700X / Intel i7 2600k @ 4.2GHz
Motherboard Fatal1ty X370 Gaming K4 / Gigabyte Z77X-UP5 TH Intel LGA 1155
Cooling MasterLiquid PRO 280 / Scythe Katana 4
Memory ADATA RGB 16GB DDR4 2666 16-16-16-39 / G.SKILL Sniper Series 16GB DDR3 1866: 9-9-9-24
Video Card(s) MSI 1080 "Duke" with 8Gb of RAM. Boost Clock 1847 MHz / ASUS 780ti
Storage 256Gb M4 SSD / 128Gb Agelity 4 SSD , 500Gb WD (7200)
Display(s) LG 29" Class 21:9 UltraWide® IPS LED Monitor 2560 x 1080 / Dell 27"
Case Cooler Master MASTERBOX 5t / Cooler Master 922 HAF
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1220 Audio Codec / SupremeFX X-Fi with Bose Companion 2 speakers.
Power Supply Seasonic FOCUS Plus Series SSR-750PX 750W Platinum / SeaSonic X Series X650 Gold
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei (RAW) / Logitech G5
Keyboard Razer BlackWidow / Logitech (Unknown)
Software Windows 10 Pro (64-bit)
Benchmark Scores Benching is for bitches.
According to this article there are some "Huge discrepancies" between the two. Anyway read on and enjoy!

Global warming may occur slower and correct itself faster than computer models have been predicting, a new study says.

The study, published in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing by Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist in the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville, reports the atmosphere may shed heat much faster than previously thought — a potentially serious problem for the computer models used to predict global climate trends.

For his study, Spencer compared a half dozen climate model predictions with actual satellite data during an 18-month period before and after warming events between 2000 and 2011.

“The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show,” Spencer said in a University of Alabama press release. “There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.”

In addition, the study reports that the atmosphere begins to shed heat earlier in the warming process than predicted. A major part of current global climate theory holds that CO2 traps heat in the atmosphere, resulting in more cloud cover and more heat — a positive feedback cycle.

Spencer’s analysis of satellite data shows the climate system starting to shed heat more than three months before the typical warming event reaches its peak. (RELATED: Polar bear climate change scientist under investigation for ‘integrity issues’)

Gavin Schmidt, a NASA Goddard climatologist, acknowledged the discrepancy between predictions and satellite data in an interview with LiveScience.

“What this mismatch is due to — data processing, errors in the data or real problems in the models — is completely unclear,” he said.

However, Schmidt continued: “Climate sensitivity is not constrained by the last two decades of imperfect satellite data, but rather the paleoclimate record.”

Other scientists assailed the study for alleged flaws in its methodology. “I cannot believe it got published,” said Kevin Trenberth, a senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, in the same LiveScience article.

But the study has found a warm reception among those critical of global warming science.

“The study illustrates how much scientists still need to learn about how our climate behaves, particularly how much heat carbon dioxide may or may not be trapping,” said James Taylor, a senior fellow for environment policy at the Heartland Institute. “When something so central has been so erroneously predicted, this tells us we have a long way to go before we can claim any future climate predictions are ‘settled science.’”

Source
 

Kreij

Senior Monkey Moderator
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
13,817 (2.21/day)
Location
Cheeseland (Wisconsin, USA)
If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.
 

TheMailMan78

Big Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Messages
22,599 (3.68/day)
Location
'Merica. The Great SOUTH!
System Name TheMailbox 5.0 / The Mailbox 4.5
Processor RYZEN 1700X / Intel i7 2600k @ 4.2GHz
Motherboard Fatal1ty X370 Gaming K4 / Gigabyte Z77X-UP5 TH Intel LGA 1155
Cooling MasterLiquid PRO 280 / Scythe Katana 4
Memory ADATA RGB 16GB DDR4 2666 16-16-16-39 / G.SKILL Sniper Series 16GB DDR3 1866: 9-9-9-24
Video Card(s) MSI 1080 "Duke" with 8Gb of RAM. Boost Clock 1847 MHz / ASUS 780ti
Storage 256Gb M4 SSD / 128Gb Agelity 4 SSD , 500Gb WD (7200)
Display(s) LG 29" Class 21:9 UltraWide® IPS LED Monitor 2560 x 1080 / Dell 27"
Case Cooler Master MASTERBOX 5t / Cooler Master 922 HAF
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1220 Audio Codec / SupremeFX X-Fi with Bose Companion 2 speakers.
Power Supply Seasonic FOCUS Plus Series SSR-750PX 750W Platinum / SeaSonic X Series X650 Gold
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei (RAW) / Logitech G5
Keyboard Razer BlackWidow / Logitech (Unknown)
Software Windows 10 Pro (64-bit)
Benchmark Scores Benching is for bitches.
If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.

Right now I am looking for the LiveScience article. I'm curious to see what else was said. I mean if models from the last 10 years were inaccurate I wonder what else could be.
 
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
2,106 (0.33/day)
System Name Norfree
Processor i5 3570k @4.4
Motherboard Gigabyte UD5H
Cooling 212 Evo
Memory 4x4GB Kingston 1600 @ 1833 9cl
Video Card(s) Sapphire Nitro Fury
Storage Corsair SSD, WD Black
Display(s) 1080p TV
Case Corsair 300-R
Audio Device(s) Auzentech Prelude > Fidelio X2s and AD-700s
Power Supply PCP&C Silent 950w
Software Win 10 Pro 64
makes sense I guess. scientists dont really know _that_ much about how the earth regulates climate, and is totally probably that they missed something key. that said, its hard to deny climate change being caused by humans
 

TheMailMan78

Big Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Messages
22,599 (3.68/day)
Location
'Merica. The Great SOUTH!
System Name TheMailbox 5.0 / The Mailbox 4.5
Processor RYZEN 1700X / Intel i7 2600k @ 4.2GHz
Motherboard Fatal1ty X370 Gaming K4 / Gigabyte Z77X-UP5 TH Intel LGA 1155
Cooling MasterLiquid PRO 280 / Scythe Katana 4
Memory ADATA RGB 16GB DDR4 2666 16-16-16-39 / G.SKILL Sniper Series 16GB DDR3 1866: 9-9-9-24
Video Card(s) MSI 1080 "Duke" with 8Gb of RAM. Boost Clock 1847 MHz / ASUS 780ti
Storage 256Gb M4 SSD / 128Gb Agelity 4 SSD , 500Gb WD (7200)
Display(s) LG 29" Class 21:9 UltraWide® IPS LED Monitor 2560 x 1080 / Dell 27"
Case Cooler Master MASTERBOX 5t / Cooler Master 922 HAF
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1220 Audio Codec / SupremeFX X-Fi with Bose Companion 2 speakers.
Power Supply Seasonic FOCUS Plus Series SSR-750PX 750W Platinum / SeaSonic X Series X650 Gold
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei (RAW) / Logitech G5
Keyboard Razer BlackWidow / Logitech (Unknown)
Software Windows 10 Pro (64-bit)
Benchmark Scores Benching is for bitches.
makes sense I guess. scientists dont really know _that_ much about how the earth regulates climate, and is totally probably that they missed something key. that said, its hard to deny climate change being caused by humans

So you admit the science is not accurate just yet however you are positive of its current conclusion?.....interesting.
 

Kreij

Senior Monkey Moderator
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
13,817 (2.21/day)
Location
Cheeseland (Wisconsin, USA)
I've lost most of my respect for scientific research.
It is no longer, "What is the effect of X", but has devolved into, "X is bad let's prove my hypothesis."
That and the amount of hypocricy of the people involved makes a lot of so called "science" laughable.

Just my opinoin.
 
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
2,106 (0.33/day)
System Name Norfree
Processor i5 3570k @4.4
Motherboard Gigabyte UD5H
Cooling 212 Evo
Memory 4x4GB Kingston 1600 @ 1833 9cl
Video Card(s) Sapphire Nitro Fury
Storage Corsair SSD, WD Black
Display(s) 1080p TV
Case Corsair 300-R
Audio Device(s) Auzentech Prelude > Fidelio X2s and AD-700s
Power Supply PCP&C Silent 950w
Software Win 10 Pro 64
So you admit the science is not accurate just yet however you are positive of its current conclusion?.....interesting.

science will never be completely accurate. its a process of understanding and is forever changing. fundamentals good sir! what is accurate today will be inaccurate tomorrow.
 

Easy Rhino

Linux Advocate
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
15,436 (2.43/day)
Location
Mid-Atlantic
System Name Desktop
Processor i5 13600KF
Motherboard AsRock B760M Steel Legend Wifi
Cooling Noctua NH-U9S
Memory 4x 16 Gb Gskill S5 DDR5 @6000
Video Card(s) Gigabyte Gaming OC 6750 XT 12GB
Storage WD_BLACK 4TB SN850x
Display(s) Gigabye M32U
Case Corsair Carbide 400C
Audio Device(s) On Board
Power Supply EVGA Supernova 650 P2
Mouse MX Master 3s
Keyboard Logitech G915 Wireless Clicky
Software The Matrix
its hard to deny climate change being caused by humans

what is accurate today will be inaccurate tomorrow.

 

streetfighter 2

New Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
1,655 (0.33/day)
Location
Philly
http://www.space.com/12469-climate-change-debunked-fast.html
Related? (Currently reading, I'll get back to it in a minute.)

EDIT: It is related.
"He's taken an incorrect model, he's tweaked it to match observations, but the conclusions you get from that are not correct," Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University, said of Spencer's new study.
It is no longer, "What is the effect of X", but has devolved into, "X is bad let's prove my hypothesis."
That and the amount of hypocricy of the people involved makes a lot of so called "science" laughable.
Science doesn't work in just one way. "X is bad, let's test my hypothesis" is actually the definition of the scientific method, but that is not the only mechanism which perpetuates science. I would argue that, "what is the effect of X" is a very difficult thing to test. We need to come up with a theory of the behavior of X, then create a hypothesis such as, "X is bad". Finally an experiment is created which says, "X is bad, because Y occurs in the presence of X".

Many discoveries are incidental, re: PTFE (teflon), graphene. Yet other discoveries were manifested purely in the mind and only observed after years of debate, re: relativity, heliocentricism, evolution. Some discoveries refine previous discoveries and help to close gaps in understanding, re: relativity to Newton's gravitation. Very often science is also about brute force, testing every single combination to find a solution, re: conditional scientific method, much of genetic engineering.

The hypocrisy in science is about where the money comes from. Who is going to fund a study about the effects of oil on the ocean floor? The oil companies of course. All of the studies about Pennsylvania shale are paid for by oil companies to Penn State university . . . Conflicts of interest are rampant in science.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
6,560 (1.08/day)
System Name Vintage
Processor i7 - 3770K @ Stock
Cooling Scythe Zipang II
Memory 2x4GB Crucial DDR3
Video Card(s) MSI GTX970
Storage M4 124GB SSD// WD Black 640GB// WD Black 1TB//Samsung F3 1.5TB
Display(s) Samsung SM223BW 21.6"
Case Generic
Power Supply Corsair HX 520W
Software Windows 7
I stopped reading after the word "may" on the first line.

Wake me up when they actually know something.
 

Wrigleyvillain

PTFO or GTFO
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
7,702 (1.28/day)
Location
Chicago
System Name DarkStar
Processor i5 3570K 4.4Ghz
Motherboard Asrock Z77 Extreme 3
Cooling Apogee HD White/XSPC Razer blocks
Memory 8GB Samsung Green 1600
Video Card(s) 2 x GTX 670 4GB
Storage 2 x 120GB Samsung 830
Display(s) 27" QNIX
Case Enthoo Pro
Power Supply Seasonic Platinum 760
Mouse Steelseries Sensei
Keyboard Ducky Pro MX Black
Software Windows 8.1 x64
I stopped paying attention to any "data" regarding this long ago. My gut and daily observations tells me we've fucked something up and it's only going to get worse. Things like the literal killer drought in the central and southwest and the massive hurricane-like thunderstorms and flooding we're getting up here now-"100 year storms" three times this year already one being a near-record blizzard with thundersnow-only strengthen this conviction. This shit is not normal, people. Yes it's happened in the past but not with such frequency and severity.

Of course I hope I'm wrong and I guess only time will tell. But If I'm not I'm just glad I don't have kids. Not sure what else to say about it.
 

The_Ish

New Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
328 (0.07/day)
Location
Sweden
Processor Intel i7 2600K
Motherboard Asus P8Z68-V Pro
Cooling Corsair H60
Memory 12GB Corsair Dominator 1600Mhz
Video Card(s) Asus GTX 580 DirectCU II
Storage Corsair F120 SSD +9,5TB storage
Display(s) Dell U2410
Case HAF X
Audio Device(s) Realtek
Power Supply Corsair AX1200
Software Win 7 x64
Benchmark Scores I only care about practical performance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
2,645 (0.56/day)
Assumption based on incomplete data means current data does not match with the assumptions?

Captain Obvious says: "No s**t Sherlock!"


Seriously, they have said bad science is bad. Rather than taking this as an excuse to either prove or deny climate change, how about we ask for some good science?

As far as severe weather, let's look at this numerically. Rate of severe storms is 1/100 years. The likelihood of a severe storm in three consecutive years is therefore (1/100)^3 = 1/1 000 000. Has the earth been around that long, if you believe in the most recent scientific discoveries, then yes. If you believe in god creating the earth 2000 years ago, then you don't have to worry about this because god will fix it all.

Whenever you can show me real facts and data I will listen. Until then you're tailoring the facts to your opinion. You're welcome to believe, but there isn't a chance that I'm going to give credance to your opinions above anyone else's.


As a side bar, perhaps someone would care to show me the climate refugees the UN predicted two decades ago. Bad science proves nothing.
 

The_Ish

New Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
328 (0.07/day)
Location
Sweden
Processor Intel i7 2600K
Motherboard Asus P8Z68-V Pro
Cooling Corsair H60
Memory 12GB Corsair Dominator 1600Mhz
Video Card(s) Asus GTX 580 DirectCU II
Storage Corsair F120 SSD +9,5TB storage
Display(s) Dell U2410
Case HAF X
Audio Device(s) Realtek
Power Supply Corsair AX1200
Software Win 7 x64
Benchmark Scores I only care about practical performance.
When did they start collecting data? And what kind of data are we talking about? Average temps?
Because that's really all you need, isn't it?
 
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
2,106 (0.33/day)
System Name Norfree
Processor i5 3570k @4.4
Motherboard Gigabyte UD5H
Cooling 212 Evo
Memory 4x4GB Kingston 1600 @ 1833 9cl
Video Card(s) Sapphire Nitro Fury
Storage Corsair SSD, WD Black
Display(s) 1080p TV
Case Corsair 300-R
Audio Device(s) Auzentech Prelude > Fidelio X2s and AD-700s
Power Supply PCP&C Silent 950w
Software Win 10 Pro 64
tenletters
If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts.
- Albert Einstein
 

the54thvoid

Intoxicated Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
12,378 (2.37/day)
Location
Glasgow - home of formal profanity
Processor Ryzen 7800X3D
Motherboard MSI MAG Mortar B650 (wifi)
Cooling be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4
Memory 32GB Kingston Fury
Video Card(s) Gainward RTX4070ti
Storage Seagate FireCuda 530 M.2 1TB / Samsumg 960 Pro M.2 512Gb
Display(s) LG 32" 165Hz 1440p GSYNC
Case Asus Prime AP201
Audio Device(s) On Board
Power Supply be quiet! Pure POwer M12 850w Gold (ATX3.0)
Software W10
More denial Bullshit...what a surprise, now go fill your 6 litre v8 gas tank. Exxon

The general scientific consensus is climate change is happening. Sea levels are rising and global temp has risen. There are regional variations and time based fluctuations but the science is there. Like all studies you will get some say 'yay' some say 'nay'. With climate change, most say 'yay', a few say 'nay'.

Especially relevant
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20739-ok-climate-sceptics-heres-the-raw-data-you-wanted.html

Other stuff
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/07/arctic-tundra-at-greater-risk.html

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10445-climate-change-special-state-of-denial.html

For the Yanks that don't trust the brits.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/search/?i=1&q=climate+change&sort=publish_date&u1=q&x=0&y=0
 

Easy Rhino

Linux Advocate
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
15,436 (2.43/day)
Location
Mid-Atlantic
System Name Desktop
Processor i5 13600KF
Motherboard AsRock B760M Steel Legend Wifi
Cooling Noctua NH-U9S
Memory 4x 16 Gb Gskill S5 DDR5 @6000
Video Card(s) Gigabyte Gaming OC 6750 XT 12GB
Storage WD_BLACK 4TB SN850x
Display(s) Gigabye M32U
Case Corsair Carbide 400C
Audio Device(s) On Board
Power Supply EVGA Supernova 650 P2
Mouse MX Master 3s
Keyboard Logitech G915 Wireless Clicky
Software The Matrix
^ so you just go around blindly believing whatever the consensus is? you would make a good scientist then.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
26,259 (4.65/day)
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2021
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (65w eco profile)
Motherboard MSI B550 Gaming Plus
Cooling Scythe Mugen (rev 5)
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-3200 32 GiB
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT
Storage Samsung 980 Pro, Seagate Exos X20 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Nixeus NX-EDG274K (3840x2160@144 DP) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW (1440x900@60 HDMI-DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay + USB 3.2 (A+C) 3.5" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse Nixeus REVEL-X
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Home 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
I naturally take issue with "global warming" because you only have about 40 years of good observations (satellite based) on a process that has been ongoing for at least a billion years. We can't accurately predict the weather 7 days from now and weather plays a major role in climate. Call me a skeptic.
 
T

twilyth

Guest
We have data from a variety of sources including but not limited to ice cores, sediment cores from sea beds, isotope analysis of fossils etc that go back at least hundreds of thousands and in some cases millions of years. There is absolutely no doubt that high atmospheric CO2 levels correlate with higher global temperature.

However we all realize that correlation does not equal cause - or at least that's something we should realize. But when you have a valid mechanism which explains the correlation - which we do - then you ignore the correlation at your own risk.

So we have evidence that high CO2 correlates with higher temps and we have a mechanism by which this can be explained. That doesn't by any means cinch the debate, but it does begin to look more and more like scientific fact and can't be ignored.
 
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,356 (0.50/day)
Location
VT
Processor Intel i7-10700k
Motherboard Gigabyte Aurorus Ultra z490
Cooling Corsair H100i RGB
Memory 32GB (4x8GB) Corsair Vengeance DDR4-3200MHz
Video Card(s) MSI Gaming Trio X 3070 LHR
Display(s) ASUS MG278Q / AOC G2590FX
Case Corsair X4000 iCue
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair RM650x 650W Fully Modular
Software Windows 10
I can't wait for the conservative media to get their hands on this story...

That being said, whether or not the predictions match, does curving carbon emissions really hurt anything? Regardless of whether or not the damage is as bad as we thought, would pre-emptively comitting to lower the amount of CO2 and other gases we are constantly emitting have any negative side effects? I think not. I am not all that interested in the particular's of Climate Change until there is a logical answer other than "HUMAN'S DID IT!?!?!" or "IT'S ALL A SCAM!!!! KEEP BURNING OIL!?!?" I see there is data that suggests the Earth is warming, and Climate Change is occuring, so I think we should address the things that we have control over...
 

Easy Rhino

Linux Advocate
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
15,436 (2.43/day)
Location
Mid-Atlantic
System Name Desktop
Processor i5 13600KF
Motherboard AsRock B760M Steel Legend Wifi
Cooling Noctua NH-U9S
Memory 4x 16 Gb Gskill S5 DDR5 @6000
Video Card(s) Gigabyte Gaming OC 6750 XT 12GB
Storage WD_BLACK 4TB SN850x
Display(s) Gigabye M32U
Case Corsair Carbide 400C
Audio Device(s) On Board
Power Supply EVGA Supernova 650 P2
Mouse MX Master 3s
Keyboard Logitech G915 Wireless Clicky
Software The Matrix
I can't wait for the conservative media to get their hands on this story...

That being said, whether or not the predictions match, does curving carbon emissions really hurt anything? Regardless of whether or not the damage is as bad as we thought, would pre-emptively comitting to lower the amount of CO2 and other gases we are constantly emitting have any negative side effects? I think not. I am not all that interested in the particular's of Climate Change until there is a logical answer other than "HUMAN'S DID IT!?!?!" or "IT'S ALL A SCAM!!!! KEEP BURNING OIL!?!?" I see there is data that suggests the Earth is warming, and Climate Change is occuring, so I think we should address the things that we have control over...

two things:

one, there is absolutely no scientific evidence than humans are warming the earth to a measurable degree.

two, yes we should pollute less. the problem comes in when the government gets involved and screws things up more.
 

Easy Rhino

Linux Advocate
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
15,436 (2.43/day)
Location
Mid-Atlantic
System Name Desktop
Processor i5 13600KF
Motherboard AsRock B760M Steel Legend Wifi
Cooling Noctua NH-U9S
Memory 4x 16 Gb Gskill S5 DDR5 @6000
Video Card(s) Gigabyte Gaming OC 6750 XT 12GB
Storage WD_BLACK 4TB SN850x
Display(s) Gigabye M32U
Case Corsair Carbide 400C
Audio Device(s) On Board
Power Supply EVGA Supernova 650 P2
Mouse MX Master 3s
Keyboard Logitech G915 Wireless Clicky
Software The Matrix
T

twilyth

Guest
The mere fact that Goldman Sachs was ready to jump into carbon trading with both feet tells me there was probably something bogus about that approach - at least as it was envisioned by policy makers in the US. Maybe someone from Euroland can tell us how carbon trading works over there and if it really works or is just another way for the banksters to bend us over.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emission_Trading_Scheme
 
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
4,815 (0.78/day)
Location
Wangas, New Zealand
System Name Darth Obsidious
Processor Intel i5 2500K
Motherboard ASUS P8Z68-V/Gen3
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper 212+ in Push Pull
Memory 2X4GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) ASUS R9 270x TOP
Storage 128GB Samsung 830 SSD, 1TB WD Black, 2TB WD Green
Display(s) LG IPS234V-PN
Case Corsair Obsidian 650D
Audio Device(s) Infrasonic Quartet
Power Supply Corsair HX650w
Software Windows 7 64bit and Windows XP Home
Benchmark Scores 2cm mark on bench with a razor blade.
Maybe all the efforts to prevent gobal warming has worked during that time and is now at a point where the ozone layer is now healing, maybe even to the point where it will be back to what it was.

Either way I don't think any corporations have made any money off reducing C02 emissions.
Just good publicity.
 
Top