On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:10:22 -0500, wrote:

yeah...see the way it works is,we only have global warming in the
summer. i think this global warming thing is a way to scare people so
they can be controlled.. lucas

http://www.minibite.com/america/malone.htm


On the other hand, a few Canadian scientists say otherwise:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:47:43 -0600, "Ryan P."
wrote:

dgk wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 13:35:21 -0500, "Clark..."
wrote:

Clark... wrote:
I couldn't open my fricken door this morning for crying out loud, (no
it was not jammed shut with a 10 inch pine stick)
gonna be outside with my trustie 5hp 24inch Craftsman snow blower all
fricken day !
takes an hour or two to do the snow here in Southampton, then we are
off to Holyoke to clear the rental property, and then to dig out my
grandmothers car out , the whole deal is gonna take 5 hours I bet.
Al Gore should the hell up, what a moron...

Clark...

Two things,
1. could you tell my hands were cold and stiff when I typed the above? holy
crap...
2. Glad to see some guys in here don't buy into the Global warming thing.
but let's add to that, how about

California is going to fall into the ocean.

the Y2K joke. I worked for a good sized bank at the time and was on one of
the many Y2K testing and compliance teams.

spotted owls can only live in one kind of tree, then found nesting in a
store sign.

Clark...

Right, rip down all the ****ing trees, who cares? Dump more CO2 into
the oceans so they become more acidic and kill off the little beasties
that fish eat. Who cares? Well, maybe the folks that eat fish. And
anything else.


That's a bit of an extreme reaction, isn't it? Just because somebody
makes fun of whacko environmental extremists doesn't mean that they
think all nature should be burnt down.


Actually, virtually all scientists agree that the world is getting
warmer, and almost all agree that human activity is having an impact.
Even the lying *******s running our government sort of have to admit
it.


That's half false. Obviously, global warming occurs. However,
nothing approaching a majority of scientists agree that HUMANS are the
*main* factor.


Nope, the vast majority of scientists are in agreement. They're
worried, and that makes me worried. Oh, not personally. We'll all be
dead before anything really drastic occurs. Let's wait until the
evidence is agreed to 100% before we do anything, even if it's then
too late.

Right, rip down all the ****ing trees, who cares? Dump more CO2 into
the oceans so they become more acidic and kill off the little beasties
that fish eat. Who cares? Well, maybe the folks that eat fish. And
anything else.

I love your Y2K joke. I worked my ass off fixing and testing computer
systems so they would function properly after 1999. Lots of other
people did the same thing. Oh, nothing happened! That's because we
worked our asses off making sure that nothing would happen. Money
wasted I guess. Asshole.

Actually, virtually all scientists agree that the world is getting
warmer, and almost all agree that human activity is having an impact.
Even the lying *******s running our government sort of have to admit
it.

And yes, California may very well fall into the ocean. That doesn't
mean I don't go there sometimes. But sometime in the next few thousand
years it is going to have a nasty earthquake. Perhaps you can be there
to enjoy it.

And for your assertion that there is no global warming because it's
snowing outside, global warming means more energy in the atmosphere.
That means a more active atmosphere, with more extreme events. Colder
colds, hotter hots, deeper snows, heavier rains.

Useless to worry about it or try to do something about it, unless you
give a shit about our kids and their kids.

Lighten up dude.
Maybe try switching to decaffeinated.


Clark...


--
Don't you have Google in your part of the world?

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:40:20 -0600, "Ryan P."
wrote:

wrote:

Who determines what the "perfect" global climate is? 10,000 years
ago, before cities and electricity, we were in an ice age. Was that the
perfect natural climate? 60,000,000 years ago most of the land mass was
tropical or sub-tropical in temperature. Was that perfect?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


The above shows exactly what some of us are concerned about. You
can't even raise any question about global warming without being
attacked as some kind of neanderthal and called an ahole. The same
thing is happening in academic circles. Many scientists have a
choice to make. Raise legitimate questions about global warming and
be ridiculed, outcast, have your funding cut off, denied tenure, or
stay silent so others can claim there is no disagreement.
.
.
And yet liberals say that conservatives are the ones that don't allow
dissenting opintions....
.
.


To your issue about Mars also seeing a rise in temp, I would add
this. According to current evidence, there have been 4 major cycles
of global warming and cooling going back about 700K years. This is
the common graph used to link CO2 with global warming. It's used by
Al Gore in his movie. It shows CO2 and the earth's temp rising and
falling together. However, it also shows that in every cycle, the
temp starts to rise a few hunderd to 1500 years BEFORE CO2 starts to
rise. I've yet to hear anyone explain that. Typical response I've
seen was from an alleged expert at a major university, who stated that
this only shows CO2 isn't responsible for the early part of the rise.
Huh? I would submit that if that answer were given to a question in
high school science, it wouldn't pass.


I don't remember for sure, but isn't that one of the "factual errors"
that the British judge cited when he ordered that Al Gore's movie can be
played in British classrooms, but it must be accompanied by a list of
things that it gets blatently wrong?


On the other hand, I've listened to an Ocean Sciences professor at MIT
who believes cycles in the output of the Sun is responsible for
increased warming of the Earth. The oceans are a major reservoir of
CO2 and as they get heated, just like a warming open bottle of soda,
they release CO2. And because the oceans are so deep, it takes
hundreds of years after the warming starts for the CO2 to increase.
Sounds pretty reasonable and it explains the graph, but like others,
this guy is dismissed as an ahole heretic by the true believers.
.
.
In 20 years when we go into another cooling trend, the wackos will
forget all about global warming and become worried about all the
wildlife that is displaced as they have to migrate south.


Before we get into a big debate (which has been done many times by
folks far more knowledgeable on these issues than us) I need to know
where we are starting from.

Do you believe in evolution? Lots of folks don't, so global warming
can't be a problem because the world is just the way God wanted it and
isn't old enough to have climate shifts. I see a leading Republican
contender doesn't believe in evolution. That should scare the shit out
of you. "If you want to believe that you and your family came from
apes, that's fine. I'll accept that," he said Friday. "I just don't
happen to think that I did."

Assuming we agree that evolution happens, are you denying that the
earth is getting warmer? Apparently some reputable scientists believe
we don't have enough information and that the evidence that we do have
is being interpreted incorrectly.

If we agree that the earth is getting warmer, is man at least partly
responsible? Some scientists seem to thing that humanity is too
inconsequential to be causing climate shifts. I look at all the stuff
we're dumping into the air, sea, and ground, and think that not only
are we altering the weather, we're causing lots of other damage -
species extinction, new types of organisms, and such.

Many scientists who disagree that man is responsible for all of global
warming agree that we're having some impact.

Do you believe that the global warming debate is a conspiracy to
funnel research funds into the pockets of evil scientists? If so, you
might also consider that well funded corporate interests might be
paying the bill for some of the scientists that oppose the global
warming idea.

Finally, do you think that global warming, if it is even occuring,
might be a good thing? I sort of lean that way a bit. I think that
it's too cold where I live (NYC). I love it here, but surfing is
limited by the fact that the ocean is now 43F. That doesn't stop the
really dedicated surfers I might point out. My main beach
(http://www.surfline.com/reports/report.cfm?id=4270) often has people
surfing in the winter. That's why God invented wet suits after all.

I admit to enjoying asking right-wingers if they think the opposition
is a conspiracy. I'm a firm believer in conspiracies myself.

Ok I can see how everyone would be upset with such freezing temps and
snow and ice hitting many of you. BUT this global warming is a fact
and there is just no getting away from it. What we are seeing is a
direct result of fresh water from ancient glaciers melting pouring
this fresh water right into salt water and this is creating a change
in the gulf stream. Have any of you see the movie ""The day after
tomorrow "" with dennis quaid starring well that movie is based on
science fact and in that movie the gulf stream changed its direction
and this created wild change of weather and what you are seeing now is
a direct result of this sma escience related fact happening. Take
note most of the storms such as tornado's and hurricanes are now
hitting category 5 status and hurricanes traveling uop the west coast
instead of the east coast the usual path and storms heading right into
the gulf of mexico storms like katrina these are direct results of
changes in the gulf stream, The Polar bears will soon become extinct
in the wild foir the ice in which they live is becoming far and few in
between. How about the global heat waves that killed so many the last
few summers and warm winters in many states where temps are normally
below zero. i am from the Catskills of New York and winters there the
last five years are considerably warmer some lakes and creeks that
used to freeze solid are not any more. France had over a 105 degrees
many times this past summer and japn as well and in chicago heat waves
killed many and warm winters in many states and in many nations 1
Greenland is actually turning green because the ice is near gone now
and whole hunks of glaciers breaking off. pay close attention it is
going to get worse yet. Freezing temps and heavy snows in the midwest
now are a direct result of the gulf streams changes. Wait till 2012
when the magnetic poles reverse thsat should prove a time to really be
coincerned about. if you doubt any of this use google and key word
the search and you will find out stuff you would rather have not found
out.

On Dec 20, 10:06 am, Auto Tech wrote:
Ok I can see how everyone would be upset with such freezing temps and
snow and ice hitting many of you. BUT this global warming is a fact
and there is just no getting away from it. What we are seeing is a
direct result of fresh water from ancient glaciers melting pouring
this fresh water right into salt water and this is creating a change
in the gulf stream. Have any of you see the movie ""The day after
tomorrow "" with dennis quaid starring well that movie is based on
science fact and in that movie the gulf stream changed its direction
and this created wild change of weather and what you are seeing now is
a direct result of this sma escience related fact happening. Take
note most of the storms such as tornado's and hurricanes are now
hitting category 5 status and hurricanes traveling uop the west coast
instead of the east coast the usual path and storms heading right into
the gulf of mexico storms like katrina these are direct results of
changes in the gulf stream, The Polar bears will soon become extinct
in the wild foir the ice in which they live is becoming far and few in
between. How about the global heat waves that killed so many the last
few summers and warm winters in many states where temps are normally
below zero. i am from the Catskills of New York and winters there the
last five years are considerably warmer some lakes and creeks that
used to freeze solid are not any more. France had over a 105 degrees
many times this past summer and japn as well and in chicago heat waves
killed many and warm winters in many states and in many nations 1
Greenland is actually turning green because the ice is near gone now
and whole hunks of glaciers breaking off. pay close attention it is
going to get worse yet. Freezing temps and heavy snows in the midwest
now are a direct result of the gulf streams changes. Wait till 2012
when the magnetic poles reverse thsat should prove a time to really be
coincerned about. if you doubt any of this use google and key word
the search and you will find out stuff you would rather have not found
out.

Climate change is occuring, but there is definite room for argument as
to how much effect humans have had on the changes. Based upon the
vast number of major changes in Earth's past history before man was
present, this climate change can be a natural phenomenon. There is no
reason for concern for the planet - it always recovers from changes,
but there are always effects to species living at the time. I view the
doomsday concerns of "global warming" with much humor. I think mother
nature has a master plan for thinning out the pesky overpopulated
human species, and all the whining is from those spoiled humans who
don't want to give up their beach condos or run their air
conditioners.

Red

Red wrote:

On Dec 20, 10:06 am, Auto Tech wrote:


Ok I can see how everyone would be upset with such freezing temps and
snow and ice hitting many of you. BUT this global warming is a fact
and there is just no getting away from it. What we are seeing is a
direct result of fresh water from ancient glaciers melting pouring
this fresh water right into salt water and this is creating a change
in the gulf stream. Have any of you see the movie ""The day after
tomorrow "" with dennis quaid starring well that movie is based on
science fact and in that movie the gulf stream changed its direction
and this created wild change of weather and what you are seeing now is
a direct result of this sma escience related fact happening. Take
note most of the storms such as tornado's and hurricanes are now
hitting category 5 status and hurricanes traveling uop the west coast
instead of the east coast the usual path and storms heading right into
the gulf of mexico storms like katrina these are direct results of
changes in the gulf stream, The Polar bears will soon become extinct
in the wild foir the ice in which they live is becoming far and few in
between. How about the global heat waves that killed so many the last
few summers and warm winters in many states where temps are normally
below zero. i am from the Catskills of New York and winters there the
last five years are considerably warmer some lakes and creeks that
used to freeze solid are not any more. France had over a 105 degrees
many times this past summer and japn as well and in chicago heat waves
killed many and warm winters in many states and in many nations 1
Greenland is actually turning green because the ice is near gone now
and whole hunks of glaciers breaking off. pay close attention it is
going to get worse yet. Freezing temps and heavy snows in the midwest
now are a direct result of the gulf streams changes. Wait till 2012
when the magnetic poles reverse thsat should prove a time to really be
coincerned about. if you doubt any of this use google and key word
the search and you will find out stuff you would rather have not found
out.



Climate change is occuring, but there is definite room for argument as
to how much effect humans have had on the changes. Based upon the
vast number of major changes in Earth's past history before man was
present, this climate change can be a natural phenomenon. There is no
reason for concern for the planet

Before you relax in you complacency, I think you should check on the
rate of change
during the "vast number of major changes in Earth's past history." I
think you will find
that never before has the rate of change been this large.

Before you become complacent you should determine how many billions,
trillions, quadrillions,
or more tons of carbon have been extracted from the planet during the
past 100 years in the
form of oil, coal, natural gas, etc and burned with the carbon dioxide
dumped in the atmosphere.
That has never happened before. There is no basis of comparison.

- it always recovers from changes,
but there are always effects to species living at the time. I view the
doomsday concerns of "global warming" with much humor. I think mother
nature has a master plan for thinning out the pesky overpopulated
human species, and all the whining is from those spoiled humans who
don't want to give up their beach condos or run their air
conditioners.

Red

Ryan P. wrote:

ecarecar wrote:


Before you relax in you complacency, I think you should check on the
rate of change
during the "vast number of major changes in Earth's past history." I
think you will find
that never before has the rate of change been this large.

.
.
Okay, I did a bit of research. It seems that just after the end of
the last major ice age, 12,000 years ago (before modern civilzation),
the global temperature jumped by about 14 degrees (F) in just a few
decades. This article:

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/climate-04k.html

Cites several other examples of rapid climate change. Two
particularly interesting paragraphs:

""Technically, an abrupt climate change occurs when the climate
system is forced to cross some threshold, triggering a transition to a
new state at a rate determined by the climate system itself and faSter
than the cause," according to a definition developed by the National
Research Council.

Abrupt change needs a trigger, an amplifier -- some mechanism to have
the trigger affect a large area -- and a source of persistence. It
turns out lots of triggers have been identified, for example, an
accumulation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, as is occurring now.""

If someone claims that there was a temperature increase of "14 degrees
(F) in just a few decades"
some time in the past, they certainly can't claim it was caused by
loading the atmosphere with
carbon dioxide in just a few decades.

It is not comparable.

"Ryan P." wrote in message
...
ecarecar wrote:


Before you relax in you complacency, I think you should check on the rate
of change
during the "vast number of major changes in Earth's past history." I
think you will find
that never before has the rate of change been this large.
.
.
Okay, I did a bit of research. It seems that just after the end of the
last major ice age, 12,000 years ago (before modern civilzation), the
global temperature jumped by about 14 degrees (F) in just a few decades.
This article:

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/climate-04k.html

Cites several other examples of rapid climate change. Two particularly
interesting paragraphs:

""Technically, an abrupt climate change occurs when the climate system is
forced to cross some threshold, triggering a transition to a new state at
a rate determined by the climate system itself and faSter than the cause,"
according to a definition developed by the National Research Council.

Abrupt change needs a trigger, an amplifier -- some mechanism to have the
trigger affect a large area -- and a source of persistence. It turns out
lots of triggers have been identified, for example, an accumulation of
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, as is occurring now.""

Yep. One trigger I've seen brought forth regarding the end of dinosaurs is
CO2 related. Seems not only did some major comet or meteoroid strike, but
was also the ignition agent of the many trees that lay dead. Kinda like
burning alot of coal or oil derivative.
Dave

On Dec 20, 10:11*am, "Ryan P."
wrote:
dgk wrote:

Before we get into a big debate (which has been done many times by
folks far more knowledgeable on these issues than us) I need to know
where we are starting from.

.
.
* Debates are fun, as long as we keep them civil. * *Unfortunately,
many people result to name-calling and slander rather than attempting to
actually debate!
.
.



Do you believe in evolution? Lots of folks don't, so global warming
can't be a problem because the world is just the way God wanted it and
isn't old enough to have climate shifts. I see a leading Republican
contender doesn't believe in evolution. That should scare the shit out
of you. "If you want to believe that you and your family came from
apes, that's fine. I'll accept that," he said Friday. "I just don't
happen to think that I did."

.
.
* I am a Christian, so I do believe that God creates everything...
However, I am more in the camp of "guided evolution." *Who are we to say
that God snapped his fingers and POOF here we were? *I have read many
Christian and Jewish leaders who believe in evolution. *Why couldn't
God's plan be for species to adapt to the environment so they can
thrive? *And since, as a Christian, I believe in Free Will, if we choose
to screw things up, that's our own problem.

* The evidence is far too plentiful. *Of course evolution happens. *To
flatly deny it is silly. *The mechanics are a matter of faith though...
If one truely believes God is all-powerful, then there's no reason to
use science to understand the process.



God is indeed all powerfull and is in control and like you I am
Christian and have to say we are not going to be able to correct this
no matter what we may try Gods is oin control and we are aloing for
the ride.God does indeed give us free will and lets us as you oput it
screw up. I and my family believe in Gods devine creation and do not
believe in anyway that my ancestors were apes.
.
.




Assuming we agree that evolution happens, are you denying that the
earth is getting warmer? Apparently some reputable scientists believe
we don't have enough information and that the evidence that we do have
is being interpreted incorrectly.
It is possible you are right I cannot debate you on this point and am
in agreement

.
.
* The earth gets warmer, and it gets cooler. *Its a cyclical process.
Since 1930, the average global temperature is about .7 degrees (Celcius)
warmer than it was. *A few hundred years earlier, colonies in Greenland
were being frozen out of existence.
.
.



If we agree that the earth is getting warmer, is man at least partly
responsible? Some scientists seem to thing that humanity is too
inconsequential to be causing climate shifts. I look at all the stuff
we're dumping into the air, sea, and ground, and think that not only
are we altering the weather, we're causing lots of other damage -
species extinction, new types of organisms, and such.

Many scientists who disagree that man is responsible for all of global
warming agree that we're having some impact.

.
.
* Of course man is partially responsible. *To think otherwise is stupid.
* * * On the other hand, the Sahara desert has been expanding for
thousands of years. *You can't tell me the ancient Egyptians were
pumping more pollutants into the air than natural forest fires around
the globe.
.
. Do you believe that the global warming debate is a conspiracy to
funnel research funds into the pockets of evil scientists? If so, you
might also consider that well funded corporate interests might be
paying the bill for some of the scientists that oppose the global
warming idea.

.
.
* A conspiracy? *No. *A histerical reaction? *Yes. *Some corporate
greed? *Yes. *How much money that goes towards "carbon credits" is going
to line Al Gore's investment portfolio? *If human-generated carbon is so
horrible, shouldn't the spokesperson for global warming be reducing his
consumption at the same time as investing in "green" technology?

Al Gore, Now there is a man who scares the hell out of me. he is a
dangerous man putting out climate related movies and years ago headed
a move to crush all antique and classic cars on the platform of air
polution. he is more influential than Ralph Nader and that is bad. I
do believe in conspiracies we see it all the time just look at the
pack of records the administration recently lost ""how conveniant"" If
Al Gore ever gets into office it will be far worse than if Hillary
gets in because we all will have to come up with nearly a 100,000
dollars to buy new technology cars and lawn equipment and anything
with an engine on it because he will make federal mandates to grab all
of our current cars and equipment under federal emmission laws. He
was in Califoprnia when he got a law passed which cost one car
collector his collection of antique corvairs all but one met the
crusher before a federal judge stopped him and threw the new law out.
he is a dangerous man and is only for the very rich and elite. his
own mansion was a heavy polluter untill only a short time ago when he
came under critisism and paid mega bucks to make it as they put it
green friendly. he is a dangerous man.
.
.

Finally, do you think that global warming, if it is even occuring,
might be a good thing? I sort of lean that way a bit. I think that
it's too cold where I live (NYC). I love it here, but surfing is
limited by the fact that the ocean is now 43F. That doesn't stop the
really dedicated surfers I might point out. My main beach
(http://www.surfline.com/reports/report.cfm?id=4270) often has people
surfing in the winter. That's why God invented wet suits after all.

.
.
* Actually, there are climatologists that say humans as a whole would
benefit from warmer climates because more people die of cold-related
problems than heat-related problems!

* Unfortunately, the last two years, the global temperature has been a
bit cooler. *In fact, the Antarctic ice caps have been steadily
expanding for MANY years in most areas, and polar bear populations have
exploded.

* I say you should invest in companies that make ski equipment! *lol
.
.



I admit to enjoying asking right-wingers if they think the opposition
is a conspiracy. I'm a firm believer in conspiracies myself.

.
.
* Some conspiracies are fun to believe in! AND are a fact as well.

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 11:19:19 -0600, "Ryan P."
wrote:

dgk wrote:

That's half false. Obviously, global warming occurs. However,
nothing approaching a majority of scientists agree that HUMANS are the
*main* factor.


Nope, the vast majority of scientists are in agreement. They're
worried, and that makes me worried. Oh, not personally. We'll all be
dead before anything really drastic occurs. Let's wait until the
evidence is agreed to 100% before we do anything, even if it's then
too late.
.
.
Actually, I'll meet you half way. From the reading I've done,
scientific organizations generally agree on the issue. However, there
are a GREAT number of individual scientists who disagree.

And a staggering number of Americans believe the sun rotates around
the earth. Actually, even one is too many.

I'm suspicious of any issue when scientific groups start using
references to work done by each other to prove their point instead of
actually conducting their OWN research.

Its like saying "My brother has this friend who's uncle's boss's
nephew's girlfriend's dad knew a guy who saw a woman spontaneously burst
into flames!"

I think you're wrong and I think the organizations are right. I think
human activity is having a huge effect on weather and other conditions
on Earth. Everyone has an impact and I do what I can to minimize that
impact. I'm no saint though. I own an old car, eat meat, and so on.
But I also commute by bike whenever possible and do what I can to
improve the environment. I think that's what we should be doing. We
use too much of the world's resources (Americans in particular).

I have not, as yet, bought a big plasma (very high electric usage I
hear) TV, but my resistance is eroding. The Superbowl is fast
approaching.

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 11:11:11 -0600, "Ryan P."
wrote:

dgk wrote:



Before we get into a big debate (which has been done many times by
folks far more knowledgeable on these issues than us) I need to know
where we are starting from.
.
.
Debates are fun, as long as we keep them civil. Unfortunately,
many people result to name-calling and slander rather than attempting to
actually debate!
.
.


Do you believe in evolution? Lots of folks don't, so global warming
can't be a problem because the world is just the way God wanted it and
isn't old enough to have climate shifts. I see a leading Republican
contender doesn't believe in evolution. That should scare the shit out
of you. "If you want to believe that you and your family came from
apes, that's fine. I'll accept that," he said Friday. "I just don't
happen to think that I did."
.
.
I am a Christian, so I do believe that God creates everything...
However, I am more in the camp of "guided evolution." Who are we to say
that God snapped his fingers and POOF here we were? I have read many
Christian and Jewish leaders who believe in evolution. Why couldn't
God's plan be for species to adapt to the environment so they can
thrive? And since, as a Christian, I believe in Free Will, if we choose
to screw things up, that's our own problem.

The evidence is far too plentiful. Of course evolution happens. To
flatly deny it is silly. The mechanics are a matter of faith though...
If one truely believes God is all-powerful, then there's no reason to
use science to understand the process.

But plenty of folks (apparently including Huckabee) think otherwise.
I'm agnostic. We're here and something created the universe, but it's
something so far beyond my understanding that it is, for all practical
purposes, God. I've long thought of the earth as some grade school
God's science project. I think he/she/it is going to get a poor grade.

....


If we agree that the earth is getting warmer, is man at least partly
responsible? Some scientists seem to thing that humanity is too
inconsequential to be causing climate shifts. I look at all the stuff
we're dumping into the air, sea, and ground, and think that not only
are we altering the weather, we're causing lots of other damage -
species extinction, new types of organisms, and such.

Many scientists who disagree that man is responsible for all of global
warming agree that we're having some impact.
.
.
Of course man is partially responsible. To think otherwise is stupid.
On the other hand, the Sahara desert has been expanding for
thousands of years. You can't tell me the ancient Egyptians were
pumping more pollutants into the air than natural forest fires around
the globe.

..1% or 40% or 70%?
.
Do you believe that the global warming debate is a conspiracy to
funnel research funds into the pockets of evil scientists? If so, you
might also consider that well funded corporate interests might be
paying the bill for some of the scientists that oppose the global
warming idea.
.
.
A conspiracy? No. A histerical reaction? Yes. Some corporate
greed? Yes. How much money that goes towards "carbon credits" is going
to line Al Gore's investment portfolio? If human-generated carbon is so
horrible, shouldn't the spokesperson for global warming be reducing his
consumption at the same time as investing in "green" technology?

So you think Gore is doing his thing for profit? I don't. Perhaps he's
wrong (I think not obviously) , but he is sincere. I think the profits
that are being made polluting the world fund campaigns that might
limit those profits.

....
Actually, there are climatologists that say humans as a whole would
benefit from warmer climates because more people die of cold-related
problems than heat-related problems!

Unfortunately, the last two years, the global temperature has been a
bit cooler. In fact, the Antarctic ice caps have been steadily
expanding for MANY years in most areas, and polar bear populations have
exploded.

Do you have a cite for that? I see this:
http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/bear-facts/

And this seems to suggest the opposite on Antarctic Ice caps:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4228411.stm

On Dec 20, 11:59*pm, "Dioclese" NONE wrote:
"Ryan P." wrote in message

...





ecarecar wrote:

Before you relax in you complacency, I think you should check on the rate
of change
during the "vast number of major changes in Earth's past history." *I
think you will find
that never before has the rate of change been this large.
.
.
*Okay, I did a bit of research. *It seems that just after the end of the
last major ice age, 12,000 years ago (before modern civilzation), the
global temperature jumped by about 14 degrees (F) in just a few decades.
This article:

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/climate-04k.html

*Cites several other examples of rapid climate change. *Two particularly
interesting paragraphs:

*""Technically, an abrupt climate change occurs when the climate system is
forced to cross some threshold, triggering a transition to a new state at
a rate determined by the climate system itself and faSter than the cause,"
according to a definition developed by the National Research Council.

Abrupt change needs a trigger, an amplifier -- some mechanism to have the
trigger affect a large area -- and a source of persistence. It turns out
lots of triggers have been identified, for example, an accumulation of
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, as is occurring now.""

Yep. *One trigger I've seen brought forth regarding the end of dinosaurs is
CO2 related. *Seems not only did some major comet or meteoroid strike, but
was also the ignition agent of the many trees that lay dead. *Kinda like
burning alot of coal or oil derivative.
Dave- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Also preceeding the dinosaur period. The earth had gone thru a huge
global warming period from excess CO2, probably from eruptions as the
tectonic plates moved. Probably no polar caps on earth. The CO2 then
broke down and the earth had a rich abundance of oxygen which fed the
muscles of the dinosaurs and resulted in their huge size. Thus the
earth will always heal itself although life changes occur. Why does
man think he will be here forever when history proves otherwise?

Red

Red wrote:

On Dec 20, 11:59 pm, "Dioclese" NONE wrote:


"Ryan P." wrote in message

.. .







ecarecar wrote:


Before you relax in you complacency, I think you should check on the rate
of change
during the "vast number of major changes in Earth's past history." I
think you will find
that never before has the rate of change been this large.


.
.
Okay, I did a bit of research. It seems that just after the end of the
last major ice age, 12,000 years ago (before modern civilzation), the
global temperature jumped by about 14 degrees (F) in just a few decades.
This article:


http://www.spacedaily.com/news/climate-04k.html


Cites several other examples of rapid climate change. Two particularly
interesting paragraphs:


""Technically, an abrupt climate change occurs when the climate system is
forced to cross some threshold, triggering a transition to a new state at
a rate determined by the climate system itself and faSter than the cause,"
according to a definition developed by the National Research Council.


Abrupt change needs a trigger, an amplifier -- some mechanism to have the
trigger affect a large area -- and a source of persistence. It turns out
lots of triggers have been identified, for example, an accumulation of
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, as is occurring now.""


Yep. One trigger I've seen brought forth regarding the end of dinosaurs is
CO2 related. Seems not only did some major comet or meteoroid strike, but
was also the ignition agent of the many trees that lay dead. Kinda like
burning alot of coal or oil derivative.
Dave- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -



Also preceeding the dinosaur period. The earth had gone thru a huge
global warming period from excess CO2, probably from eruptions as the
tectonic plates moved. Probably no polar caps on earth. The CO2 then
broke down and the earth had a rich abundance of oxygen which fed the


The CO2 then broke down??

How did that happen?

muscles of the dinosaurs and resulted in their huge size. Thus the
earth will always heal itself although life changes occur. Why does
man think he will be here forever when history proves otherwise?

Red

On Dec 21, 6:49*pm, "Ryan P."
wrote:
ecarecar wrote:
The CO2 then broke down??

How did that happen?

.
.
* Photosynthesis is one good example.

Correct. Plants intake CO2, absorb the carbon, and exhale the
oxygen.
The very warm weather produced an abundance of plant life, with few
animals in the food chain to eat them. The bigger the plants grew,
the more photosynthesis for conversion of CO2 to O.