Thanks for the response, Robert. The positive feedback ramifications are alarming to me too. But, the numbers fluctuate within specific locations and within the scientific community. Some say methane is 40 times more nefarious and some say 25. There are different types of methane compounds in different places and that may account for some of the differences as well as the time period in the atmosphere that you point out. I have seen articles that say over time, the methane will be buffered by some mechanism so they don’t see an emergency. There are very knowledgeable scientists out there who are not overly concerned with the methane, for various reasons. I try to stick with the rock-solid NASA, NOAA, NCA, YPCC, and IPCC information. The other aspect of methane, as with all of the modeling is that it is very complex. And it’s hard to do the complete story of permafrost methane in a six minute blog post. The methane story could be an entire book —now there’s an idea. The blog article, such as it is, points out why it is scary and offers some diverging opinions on just how apocalyptic it might, based on the science. Again, thanks for your response.