[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message Index][Thread Index]
Re: Al Gore where are you?
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_00B0_01C77B18.BFF00C00
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=20
Okay here are my 1000 words on the subject. All this global warming talk =
assumes we are on some peaceful, stable, benign planet and that only =
humankind can foul it up, or save it. Some remind us that there have =
been climatic fluctuations throughout time, and there might be some =
variations that give us reasons to quibble about it.
I don't see it that way at all. Where did man have a hand in any of =
these events?
- Precambrian period (4.6 billion to 523 million years ago)=20
- Vendian period (523-543 million years ago)=20
- Both Precambrian and Vendian periods host to at least one mass =
extinction each.
-the Cambrian period ranges from 543-510 million years ago
-four mass extinctions occurred during the course of the Cambrian
- Ordovician period (510- 438 million years ago)
- Ordovician extinction was second most devastating in earth history
-Devonian period ranged from 408-360 million years ago
- A major intra-Devonian extinction occurred at the Frasnian-Famennian =
boundary=20
- Permian Period (286-248 million years ago)
- 90-95% of marine species became extinct in the Permian
- Numerous evolutionary radiations occurred during the Cretaceous =
(144-65 million years ago)=20
- 85% of all species died in the End-Cretaceous (K-T) extinction
Don't foget there were "Minor Extinctions" in the Triassic, Jurassic, =
Oligocene, and Neogene. I guess it wasn't minor to everything that had =
their gene pool dry up there.
So boys and girls lots of things can go wrong and plenty did go wrong.
Calculating for Earth's Wobble and knowing that the last major glacial =
thaw was 10,000 years ago, even if humankind is doing all it can now to =
heat things up, it might do no good because of the Earth's wobble; it is =
scheduled to head into another ice age.=20
And with the feeble state of knowledge regarding solar science, it might =
turn out that the big orange ball has more to do with it than is =
currently suspected.
Forget the security business, the only question is if Al will let us =
join his little racket and cash in too. I wonder if having money to burn =
increases your carbon footprint?
"Milhouse Van Houten" <none@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message =
news:1rnl131c479tf4ibpd9q92atlai6ju4ssm@xxxxxxxxxx
> GROUP MODERATOR wrote:
>=20
>>
>>"Milhouse Van Houten" <none@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message=20
>>news:3ell13pq28b1u40e6gfkkqf0a86hg394gg@xxxxxxxxxx
>>> Did you even see the movie? See the message - not the messenger.
>>
>>this cat from mit disagrees
>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17997788/site/newsweek/=20
>>
>=20
>=20
> His opinion is his prerogative. He is in the minority.
>=20
>=20
> =
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientifi=
c_assessment_of_global_warming
> (not an editorial)
>=20
>=20
> This article lists scientists who have expressed doubt regarding the
> current scientific opinion on global warming. The mainstream position
> of the climate science community has been summarized in the 2001 Third
> Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
> (IPCC) as follows:
>=20
> 1. The global average surface temperature has risen 0.6 =B1 0.2 =B0C
> since the late 19th century, and 0.17 =B0C per decade in the last 30
> years. [1]
> 2. "There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming
> observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities",
> in particular emissions of the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide and
> methane. [2]
> 3. If greenhouse gas emissions continue the warming will also
> continue, with temperatures increasing by 1.4 =B0C to 5.8 =B0C between
> 1990 and 2100. Accompanying this temperature increase will be a sea
> level rise of 9 cm to 88 cm, and increases in some types of extreme
> weather. On balance the impacts of global warming will be
> significantly negative, especially for larger values of warming. [3]
>=20
> While the first point is now accepted by virtually all climate
> scientists, a small number of scientists-relative to the number
> supporting the mainstream view-actively disagree with the second or
> third points. This article lists persons with scientific experience
> who have, since the Third Assessment Report, published research or
> made public comments opposing at least one of the conclusions listed
> above.
>=20
> The criterion for inclusion in this list is that the individual has
> published one peer-reviewed article in the broad area of natural
> sciences (though not necessarily in a field related to climate). For a
> general list including other individuals, see global warming skeptics.
> Inclusion is based on specific, attributable statements in the
> individual's own words, and not on listings in petitions or surveys.
>=20
>
------=_NextPart_000_00B0_01C77B18.BFF00C00
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16414" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff background=3D"">
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> <BR>Okay here are my 1000 words =
on the=20
subject. All this global warming talk assumes we are on some peaceful, =
stable,=20
benign planet and that only humankind can foul it up, or save it. Some =
remind us=20
that there have been climatic fluctuations throughout time, and there =
might be=20
some variations that give us reasons to quibble about it.<BR>I don't see =
it that=20
way at all. Where did man have a hand in any of these events?<BR>- =
Precambrian=20
period (4.6 billion to 523 million years ago) <BR>- Vendian period =
(523-543=20
million years ago) <BR>- Both Precambrian and Vendian periods host to at =
least=20
one mass extinction each.<BR><BR>-the Cambrian period ranges from =
543-510=20
million years ago<BR>-four mass extinctions occurred during the course =
of the=20
Cambrian<BR><BR>- Ordovician period (510- 438 million years ago)<BR>- =
Ordovician=20
extinction was second most devastating in earth =
history<BR><BR> -Devonian=20
period ranged from 408-360 million years ago<BR>- A major intra-Devonian =
extinction occurred at the Frasnian-Famennian boundary <BR><BR>- Permian =
Period=20
(286-248 million years ago)<BR>- 90-95% of marine species became extinct =
in the=20
Permian<BR><BR>- Numerous evolutionary radiations occurred during the =
Cretaceous=20
(144-65 million years ago) <BR>- 85% of all species died in the =
End-Cretaceous=20
(K-T) extinction<BR><BR>Don't foget there were "Minor Extinctions" in =
the=20
Triassic, Jurassic, Oligocene, and Neogene. I guess it wasn't minor to=20
everything that had their gene pool dry up there.<BR><BR>So boys and =
girls lots=20
of things can go wrong and plenty did go wrong.<BR><BR>Calculating for =
Earth's=20
Wobble and knowing that the last major glacial thaw was 10,000 years=20
ago, even if humankind is doing all it can now to heat things up, =
it might=20
do no good because of the Earth's wobble; it is scheduled to head into =
another=20
ice age. <BR><BR>And with the feeble state of knowledge regarding solar =
science,=20
it might turn out that the big orange ball has more to do with it than =
is=20
currently suspected.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Forget the security business, the only =
question is=20
if Al will let us join his little racket and cash in too. I wonder if =
having=20
money to burn increases your carbon footprint?</DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR><BR>"Milhouse Van Houten" <none@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in =
message=20
news:1rnl131c479tf4ibpd9q92atlai6ju4ssm@xxxxxxxxxx<BR>> GROUP =
MODERATOR=20
wrote:<BR>> <BR>>><BR>>>"Milhouse Van Houten"=20
<none@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message=20
<BR>>>news:3ell13pq28b1u40e6gfkkqf0a86hg394gg@xxxxxxxxxx<BR>>>=
;>=20
Did you even see the movie? See the message - not the=20
messenger.<BR>>><BR>>>this cat from mit=20
disagrees<BR>>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17997788/site/newsweek/ =
<BR>>><BR>> <BR>> <BR>> His opinion is his =
prerogative. He=20
is in the minority.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>>=20
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientifi=
c_assessment_of_global_warming<BR>>=20
(not an editorial)<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> This article lists =
scientists who=20
have expressed doubt regarding the<BR>> current scientific opinion on =
global=20
warming. The mainstream position<BR>> of the climate science =
community has=20
been summarized in the 2001 Third<BR>> Assessment Report of the=20
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change<BR>> (IPCC) as =
follows:<BR>>=20
<BR>> 1. The global average surface temperature has risen =
0.6 =B1=20
0.2 =B0C<BR>> since the late 19th century, and 0.17 =B0C per decade =
in the last=20
30<BR>> years. [1]<BR>> 2. "There is new and stronger =
evidence=20
that most of the warming<BR>> observed over the last 50 years is =
attributable=20
to human activities",<BR>> in particular emissions of the greenhouse =
gases=20
carbon dioxide and<BR>> methane. [2]<BR>> 3. If =
greenhouse gas=20
emissions continue the warming will also<BR>> continue, with =
temperatures=20
increasing by 1.4 =B0C to 5.8 =B0C between<BR>> 1990 and 2100. =
Accompanying this=20
temperature increase will be a sea<BR>> level rise of 9 cm to 88 cm, =
and=20
increases in some types of extreme<BR>> weather. On balance the =
impacts of=20
global warming will be<BR>> significantly negative, especially for =
larger=20
values of warming. [3]<BR>> <BR>> While the first point is now =
accepted by=20
virtually all climate<BR>> scientists, a small number of =
scientists-relative=20
to the number<BR>> supporting the mainstream view-actively disagree =
with the=20
second or<BR>> third points. This article lists persons with =
scientific=20
experience<BR>> who have, since the Third Assessment Report, =
published=20
research or<BR>> made public comments opposing at least one of the=20
conclusions listed<BR>> above.<BR>> <BR>> The criterion for =
inclusion=20
in this list is that the individual has<BR>> published one =
peer-reviewed=20
article in the broad area of natural<BR>> sciences (though not =
necessarily in=20
a field related to climate). For a<BR>> general list including other=20
individuals, see global warming skeptics.<BR>> Inclusion is based on=20
specific, attributable statements in the<BR>> individual's own words, =
and not=20
on listings in petitions or surveys.<BR>> =
<BR>></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_00B0_01C77B18.BFF00C00--
alt.security.alarms Main Index |
alt.security.alarms Thread Index |
alt.security.alarms Home |
Archives Home