Re: Al Gore where are you?

[JoeRaisin <joeraisin@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Robert L Bass wrote:
>>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...
>
>
> No, that is not correct.  Numerous mainstream
> scientific studies indicate that (1) climate change
> is cyclical with cycles lasting tens of thousands
> of years; and (2) the curret cycle has been
> significantly altered by human activity.  In laymen's
> terms, what was a very gradual uphill climb in
> average annual temperature has suddenly (in
> geological terms 100 years is sudden) become a
> much steeper slope.
>

So how are 'we' causing the same thing on mars?

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html


> This has been the concensus among virtually all
> serious scientific studies on the subject for years.
>

And any study that doesn't blame mankind for global warming is:

A) not serious
B) Doesn't get massive government grants

> On the other side are contrarian, outlier "scientists"
> primarily bought and paid for by industrial interests
> who claim that they have examined the same data
> yet see no problem.
>
> It is noteworthy that some of the same "scientists"
> who deny that industrial pollution is endangering
> the planet also stood up for the cause of such
> public interest magnates as Phillip Morris when
> they tried to quash government reports that
> smoking causes cancer and later, that second-
> hand smoke is hazardous.
>

Names?  Dates?


> Some of the same names crop up again in places
> like Klamath river basin where (with the assistance
> of a certain Republican administration) a bio
> disaster occured.
>
>
>>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.
>
>
> There is a lot more than "some variations" and
> there's reason to do a lot more than quibble.
> Real scientific evidence points to a slowly
> building disaster which can still be averted if
> individuals and governments do something
> about it.  Alternatively, we can pretend it's nothing
> and leave things as they are.  We'll likely only
> see the beginning of what this causes.  Our
> children and grandchildren will pay the price.
> A few decades away there will probably be
> mass starvation.  Some estimates say that
> over a billion people will die from coming drought.
>

It would be more believable that mankind is causing it if the person
shouting the loudest actaully believed it himself.

His behavior shows he does not.  For him its a money grab.

> If you know anything about weather, you know
> that a 2º-3º rise in ocean temperatures can
> mean the difference between a season of
> several category 2 and 3 hurricanes and one
> with a dozen or more category 5 storms.  New
> Orleans was nothing compared to what will
> happen when a category 5 storm strikes Miami
> even despite the new construction codes.
>
>
>>I don't see it that way at all...
>
>
> That doesn't mean it isn't happening.  It only
> means you don't see it.
>
>
>>Where did man have a hand in any of these
>>events?
>>- Precambrian period (4.6 billion to 523 million
>>years ago)
>
> - Vendian period (523-543 million years ago)
>
>>- Both Precambrian and Vendian periods host
>>to at least one mass extinction each.
>
>
> The real questions isn't what happened 523
> million years ago.  It isn't even what will happen
> 523 million years from now.  The issue is what
> will happen in the next few decades -- perhaps
> the next few generations.
>
>
>>So boys and girls lots of things can go wrong
>>and plenty did go wrong.
>
>
> So that makes it alright to destroy what we have
> now?
>

Maybe if everyone in the world bought carbon offsets from Al...