Re: [hreg] Re: Very interesting anti-global warming video
- I was under the impression that Milankovitch cycles and other extraterrestrial,
"cosmic" factors had been fairly well established not to be the causes of
Earth's glacial periods, etc.
I agree that neither (1) global warming nor (2) peak oil are stand-alone,
exclusive reasons for our concern. There are also the other inter-related
matters of (3) global overpopulation vis-a-vis (4) fresh water depletion and
(6)cropland loss. Humanity must face them all soon, in a coordinated manner, or
our descendants will curse us unto eternity. Once again, to paraphrase our
misbegotten national "leaders", we must NOT wait until the smoking gun is in the
form of a... dead planet.
- We are all Human beings here together. We have to help one another, since
otherwise there is NO ONE who will help.
- All countries need a NO REGRETS strategic energy policy. Think ahead 7
> It doesn't look like the discussion on the cause/causes of climate change is
> over. I favor renewable energy for a lot of reasons other than global warming.
> This is the tip of the iceberg - Google produced 968,000 hits on "warming on
> planets nasa"
> Ed Sarlls
> Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says,
> Sun Blamed for Warming of Earth and Other Worlds,
> Mars Emerging from Ice Age, Data Suggest
> Pluto Warming,
> Conflicting Claims on Global Warming and Why It's All Moot,
> Is Global Warming Solar Induced? Not According to the Planets,
> Climate change hits Mars,
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Kevin Conlin
> To: email@example.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 1:23 PM
> Subject: RE: [hreg] Re: Very interesting anti-global warming video
> I also have friends who don't believe the argument either, however, consider
> several factors.
> First, the world consumes roughly 80 million barrels of oil a day. That's
> 3.36 billion gallons, and I am guessing at least half is burned as fuel.
> So, we're burning 1.68 billion gallons of oil a day. Coal is a much larger
> energy source, with China bringing on line one new coal plant a week. Now
> think of the thousands of coal plants in the world, each spewing pollution
> and CO2 into the air every day, for decades.
> Also consider that the worlds forests are disappearing at an alarming rate,
> and they are one of the greatest CO2 sinks on the planet. In addition, the
> decomposition of what's left of the forest will now break down, adding an
> estimated 20% of the total CO2 that goes in the atmosphere
> Given that the industrial revolution is at least 150 years old, and we have
> been spewing for that amount of time, how can anyone logically argue that
> dumping these millions of tons of CO2 and other pollutants into the air
> every single day cannot have some adverse affect on the atmosphere?
> I have yet to hear a sound, logical argument that refutes the parallel path
> between CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere with the slow warming trend,
> the two curves are almost identical. I have heard all sorts of anecdotal
> evidence, but nothing solid.
> It's true that we haven't recorded accurate weather data for very long, but
> when million year old ice sheets are melting, it tells me it is at least the
> warmest it has been in a million years, it's good enough for me.
> The bottom line is, we can't afford to be wrong. Well, I guess we can, but
> all future generations will suffer the consequences if we are. Are you
> willing to take that risk for lack of solid "proof"?
> Kevin Conlin
> From: Daniel Reagan [mailto:dreagan1969@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 12:58 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [hreg] Re: Very interesting anti-global warming video
> I agree that we need to move away from fossil fuels but I am not sold on the
> idea that humans are causing global warming.
> The earth does not spin in a perfect circle around the sun, the earth is not
> on a perfect axis and the sun is a constantly changing reaction.
> I might be incorrect in this point but it seems like we have only been
> accurately measuring the weather for the past couple of hundred of years, a
> very small window of time in the overall history of the earth. It seems to
> me that if the earth is about 4.5 billion yrs old, and we have been keeping
> accurate weather for lets say 2,000 yrs then we are only looking at a very,
> very, very small percentage of history. On top of that we have only been
> using fossil fuels for 5,000 yrs (heavily using them for maybe 500 yrs)
> however we feel quite comfortable making bold statements that we are the one
> causing the global warming trend.
> I just don't think that we have enough data to make a judgment either way. I
> agree that it is probably not a good idea to continue on the path we are on,
> but I think that there are a lot better reasons than global warming.
> Best Regards,