Explain how you can be an investor in one technology but then advocate its replacement with another competing technology. It sounds like you are working at cross-purposes.
Now we're talking. This is a good question. Think of a stream interrupted by a small pond. The water from the upstream goes into the pond, while the water in the pond escapes into the downstream. If you put a few rocks at the point where water flows out of the pond, the rocks will partially block the water flow, but not completely stop it. However, for the first few minutes after you throw the rocks, less water flows out of the pond than that flows in. The water level in the pond rises until the water can flow over the rocks. At this point same amount of water flows out as flows in and the water level stops rising. The upstream is the sun, the downstream is the space, the pond is the earth, the water is heat, the water level is the temperature, and the rocks are the greenhouse gases. So what if the greenhouse gases are not uniform (rocks do not completely block the waterway)? Well, the temperature will rise less than if they are uniform, but still will rise nonetheless.
The universe that contains the earth, "its" solar system, plus a few billion stars in the milky way galaxy, plus a few billion other galaxies, and plus many more stuff that I cannot name, yes, that universe altogether could be a closed system if God is not watching. But since God is watching, and there has to be something in exchange between God and the universe for God to see it, I doubt even that universe is a closed system.
Read any scientific, peer-reviewed journal, and you'll see what I'm talking about. As any good conservative should do, don't believe newspaper articles nor editorial pages. Read the real thing. I've given several links in other threads. You're just registered too recently to see my posts.
Do you know anything about investing? You know what, most investors try to make money, not a political statement. It really sounds like you're not an investor nor a trader. What are you doing here?
Frozen food tests out as having a high percentage of it's nutrients intact. Canning involves high temperatures which destroy some of the nutrition.
[qiote]The water level in the pond rises until the water can flow over the rocks. At this point same amount of water flows out as flows in and the water level stops rising.[/quote] Meaning as long as there is an outlet, the water flowing into the pond and the water leaving the pond will be in balance and the pond will remain at the same level. Greenhouse gases would have to be present in enough quantity and be evenly distributed through the atmosphere in order for the earthâs temperatures to rise and global warming to really happen. Given enough water the pond will eventually rise over its banks so your analogy is flawed. An excess of water will find a way to leave the pond. If we really had global warming, why have we not had a uniform rise in temperatures? Cities have gotten hotter, but rural areas have not.
Who are you to say what God must do? What makes you think God must kow-tow to you? Job 38:4-6 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;