BS: Global warming - the myth

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Mar 07 - 02:37 PM

No, you had it right. I believe, from the evidence available, that global warming is real, and occurring, and is part of the nature of being on a planet of a variable star like the sun. CO2 MAY be contributing to it, but the climactic shift, from historical and pre-historical records ( ice cores, fossils, etc) will occur regardless of our efforts to reduce emissions. We may well want to reduce those emissions, but NOT with the belief that that would stop global warming.

The effect of a change in solar flux is illustrated by the climactic changes upon other planets of the same sun (which have totally different models, BUT still are heat-driven engines that react to the energy input into them). Should you show me evidence that other planets of other stars are showing similar climactic shifts, without a corresponding change in their star's flux, I will certainly consider other effects, such as galactic dust. But I will also not postulate LGM without further evidence of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Mar 07 - 02:43 PM

"Did you know birds are actually dinosaurs according to phlyogenetic analysis? "

Yes, I did know that.

So, what would dinosaur taste like?

Just like chicken?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Mar 07 - 05:05 PM

There is no doubt whatsoever that adding CO2 to the atmosphere has a greenhouse effect, that the amount of C O" in the atmosphere has increased considerably in recent history, and that there has been a degfree of global warming.

The only argument is about whether this is the primary cause for global warming, and whether human activity is te primary cause for the CO2 increase.

Whatever the truith of that, pretty obviously pumping massive quanitities of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere seems a very bad idea in the circumstances

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Mar 07 - 06:30 PM

"amount of low clouds"

Australian research is showing that clouds are getting higher.... certain little frogs need a certain amount of humidity to stay alive on mountains, and they are dying out lower down at a rate that has been shown.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Stu
Date: 16 Mar 07 - 04:29 AM

"I believe, from the evidence available, that global warming is real, and occurring, and is part of the nature of being on a planet of a variable star like the sun"

But where is your evidence for this? Have you read any of the links I put up? Show me where your evidence is - not those links to Jupiter and Mars you put up earlier - refer to my previous posts for the evidence on those sites. I need references and links bruce - show me the data and analysis. Show me the experts discussions.

"The effect of a change in solar flux is illustrated by the climactic changes upon other planets of the same sun (which have totally different models, BUT still are heat-driven engines that react to the energy input into them)"

You ain't listening mate. Show me the evidence I asked for in previous posts. What about the other planets. Show me where the evidence for the Sun heating Jupiter is.

I have presented plenty of evidence to show the case for current global warming is because of man pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. It's all in the links in previous posts. Your single source for your 'solar flux' hypothesis is the link to the Abdussamatov article - his evidence was debunked convincingly by climatologists in the very same article. So show me another article that supports this theory.

Just repeating the same old line parrot-fashion does not make a convincing argument.

Not all extant dinosaurs do taste of chicken. Phasianus colchicus tastes just like pheasant.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 16 Mar 07 - 05:09 AM

In that case, chickens, lizards, and dinosaurs should all taste pretty much the same...

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Mar 07 - 06:19 AM

"There is no doubt whatsoever that adding CO2 to the atmosphere has a greenhouse effect, that the amount of C O" in the atmosphere has increased considerably in recent history, and that there has been a degfree of global warming."

All true- but there have been periods of global warming before, with NO man-made CO2 emissions.


"The only argument is about whether this is the primary cause for global warming, and whether human activity is te primary cause for the CO2 increase."

Both questions are still in the range of "We don't know"



"Whatever the truith of that, pretty obviously pumping massive quanitities of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere seems a very bad idea in the circumstances "

I NEVER said it was a GOOD idea. We should consider stopping it. BUT, we must have other considerations:

1. It WILL NOT STOP global warming.

2. The stopping of CO2 emissions may well destroy the industrial capability that we (mankind) need to SURVIVE the real global warming ( ie, climactic shift) that is taking place.

3. The focus on CO2 has been used by some as a smokescreen to ingore dealing withg the inevitable effects ( flooding, agricultural failure, species extinction) that WILL occur even after we STOP all CO2 emmissions.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Amos
Date: 16 Mar 07 - 08:01 AM

Earth bakes in hottest quarter on record
By Veronica Smith in Washington
March 16, 2007

THE Earth has just experienced its warmest December-February since records began 128 years ago, adding fire to global warming concerns.
A US government agency reported a record warm January worldwide pushed average temperatures to 0.72C above normal for the 20th Century.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said it was the highest average temperature for the period since records began in 1880.

The report came less than a month after a UN panel said that global warming was almost certainly caused by human activity and several governments and international bodies have sounded the alarm over the need to cut carbon emissions.

The El Nino phenomenon, an abnormal warming of surface ocean waters in the eastern Pacific, contributed to the chart-busting combined global land and ocean surface temperature, the NOAA said.

But El Nino rapidly weakened in February, as ocean temperatures in the central equatorial Pacific cooled more than 0.3C and were near average for the month.

Nevertheless, the ocean-surface temperature in the period tied for second warmest on record, the agency said, just 0.06C cooler than the record established during the very strong El Nino episode of 1997-1998.

The NOAA scientists pointed to a steady rise in temperatures in recent decades.

During the past century, global surface temperatures have increased at a rate near 0.06C per decade.

"But the rate of increase has been three times larger since 1976, or 0.18C per decade, with some of the largest temperature increases occurring in the high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere," they said.

For the United States alone, the December 2006-February 2007 winter season had an overall temperature that was close to average, while December was the 11th warmest on record.

The UN's Intergovernment Panel of Climate Change said last month that human activity was almost certain to blame for global warming and warned that the Earth's average surface temperature could rise between 1.1C and 6.4C by 2100.

Fossil fuel pollution will raise temperatures this century, worsen floods, droughts and hurricanes, melt polar ice and damage the climate system for a thousand years to come, the UN's top panel on climate change said.

---

Who don't know?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 16 Mar 07 - 09:31 AM

One thing that makes me really wild is the fact that all pro green people insist that the way forward is to price motorists off the roads.

All very well if you have access to good public transport, and earn good money. Many of us do not.

I tow a caravan because it is the only holiday I can afford. I'd look bloody silly trying to do that without a car. I also live in a town where, unless you work for Townsend Hook, you have to leave the village. Public transport operates from 6.45am to approx 8.30pm, so no shiftwork, no early jobs, like cleaning, and no late jobs like bar or restaurant work, UNLESS you run a car.

So, all you environmentallists out there, tell me what I should do, and then answer one other very pertinent question.

Why should the poorest in the community always bear the brunt of this kind of situation. Why should we be pushed off th roads while that fat gutted pig Prescott will still use his two Jags because he's got pocketsful of our cash in the form of expenses.

What a wonderful Britain to live in. We'll all work on the nearest farm, never go more than fifty miles from our birthplace, and stand by the roadside doffing our flat caps when the squire goes past in his limo.

What century is this?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 16 Mar 07 - 09:52 AM

Snapshots of a warming planet....

In 2005, a Russian research vessel was the first ship able to sail through arctic waters and reach the North Pole unhindered by pack ice.

The genocide in Darfur is likely the first human evidence of war based on diminishing farm land induced by global warming. Most low-lying land in Darfur was traditionally farmed by a family of tribes who tended the wells, springs, and soil. Nomadic Arabs would pass through these lands, using the water and grazing their herds on surrounding hillsides. For hundreds of years, this peaceful relationship existed. In the last few years, a warmer, dryer climate in Darfur has caused springs and wells to dry out and hillside grasses to disappear. This has resulted in the framers fencing off their lands for the first time ever, and to closing access to water from the Arabs. The reaction from the Arabs has been to band together to take these resources by force, and to begin to eliminate the private property of the farmers, and the farmers themselves. There is no racial difference in the Farmers and Arabs ; the genocide is based on a struggle for diminishing resources.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Wolfgang
Date: 16 Mar 07 - 12:42 PM

We Have to Take Away People's Fear of Climate Change (DER SPIEGEL interview with one of the leading German experts)

Unfortunately many scientists see themselves too much as priests whose job it is to preach moralistic sermons to people.

His opinion (also from other sources) in a nutshell: Global warming is real and unavoidable, man is responsible for most of it, we should better deal with the consequences, there's no need for panic and doomsday predictions.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 16 Mar 07 - 12:49 PM

There was an article in yesterday's (15.03.07) 'Independent' newspaper (UK) by the Climatologist, Carl Wunsch who was featured on the Channel 4 programme. The article is entitled, 'I should never have trusted Channel 4'.

Wunsch tells us that, "...in the film it appears that I am saying that since carbon dioxide exists in the ocean in such large quantities human influence must not be very important - diametrically opposed to the point I was making - which is that global warming is real and threatening."

He goes on to say that, " Channel 4 now says that they were making a film in a series of "polemics". There is nothing in the communication we had that suggested they were making a film that was one-sided, anti-educational, and misleading. I took them at face value - a great error."

Draw your own conclusions!!

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Bee
Date: 16 Mar 07 - 01:09 PM

Don, I don't think 'all pro-greens' say anything of the sort. I live further in the boonies than you ever will, there is no public transit at all. It is Big Oil which is pricing you off the road, not the greens. Vehicles with better fuel economies, sensible alternate fuels (ethanol is a sham, IMO, as it is just as unfriendly to produce in the long run), more dependence on wind power, solar arrays, decentralization so jobs will be in more communities, not just in gigantic urban centres, good public transit, etc., are things more likely to be effective.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Mar 07 - 01:29 PM

Oh, ethanol is not a total sham, Bee...but it is certainly no major solution, as it just trades one resource abuse for another, but it may help bridge the gap if we treat it like that...a temporary crutch.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 17 Mar 07 - 07:25 AM

"there have been periods of global warming before, with NO man-made CO2 emissions"

During the Constantinan and medieval times - C6 & 1300s - there were massive die-offs of people - and their associated activities - and a corresponding drop in CO2 produced.

Volcanic activity has also happened -> massive global atmospheric disruptions -> human disruptions....


"3. The focus on CO2 has been used by some as a smokescreen to ignore dealing with the inevitable effects ( flooding, agricultural failure, species extinction) that WILL occur even after we STOP all CO2 emissions. "

By those like you apparently - those in the choir KNOW we DO have to deal with such resultant disasters whether we stop polluting now and have limited disasters, or push the limits further and have bigger disasters...



""The only argument is about whether this is the primary cause for global warming, and whether human activity is the primary cause for the CO2 increase."
Both questions are still in the range of "We don't know""


So the CONSERVATIVE decision is to just keep the accelerator pressed down hard to the floor, just in case there is no curve on the cliff road hidden in the fog ahead?...

Alleged 'Primary Cause' or not, human activity IS an input - welding the accelerator to the floor helps in what way?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Bagpuss
Date: 19 Mar 07 - 11:49 AM

Durkin's response to reasonable criticism...

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Peace
Date: 19 Mar 07 - 01:42 PM

Well, whether or not the planet is warming, it's evident that the scientific and media communities are.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Mar 07 - 01:48 PM

LOL...

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Mar 07 - 01:57 PM

Fooles,

I have given reasons why IMO the blind dash to limit CO2 is flawed.

I have NO PROBLEM if you want to reduce CO2, but I have given several examples of how THAT is presented AS A CURE to global warming, which I dispute.

"By those like you apparently - "

HARDLY. I claim that those who feel that Global warming is caused by C)2 emmissions are ignoring the significant effects of the variable solar flus. Your example is of no validity- LOOK at the graphs that Wolfgang presented earlier- WHEN did the climate shift? NOT at the time YOU state, nor do you account for the previous several hundred million years of data.



"So the CONSERVATIVE decision is to just keep the accelerator pressed down hard to the floor, just in case there is no curve on the cliff road hidden in the fog ahead?...

Alleged 'Primary Cause' or not, human activity IS an input - welding the accelerator to the floor helps in what way?"


False claim- I have said the problem with CO2 emission reduction is the claim that it will stop Global Warming, and reduce our ability to DEAL with Global Warming, NOT that we should continue unlimited production of CO2. Feel free to stop all CO2 emmissions- BUT PLAN to deal with the real effects of global warming REGARDLESS.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Peace
Date: 19 Mar 07 - 02:28 PM

Simple and easy to read.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Mar 07 - 02:40 PM

Peace,

Thank you.

8-{E

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Stringsinger
Date: 19 Mar 07 - 03:00 PM

There are scientists who will question the idea that it's just the sun. They use dated stats to prove their point but not recent ones. There are stats that support that we are affecting the weather and climate change.

There is no consensus on this issue.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Mar 07 - 03:05 PM

"There are scientists who will question the idea that it's just the sun. "



I DID NOT SAY "JUST"!!!!!!!!


For various reasons, GLOBAL WARMING WILL OCCUR. The solar flux is one componant- as is the Earth's orbit, polar icecap reflectivity, Natural and man-made particles and gases.

Wishing it away DOES NOT WORK!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Mar 07 - 03:15 PM

From the "contrails" thread blinky-

"It had been hypothesized that in regions such as the United States with heavy air traffic, contrails affected the weather, reducing solar heating during the day and radiation of heat during the night by increasing the albedo. The suspension of air travel for three days in the United States after September 11, 2001 provided an opportunity to test this hypothesis. Measurements did show that without contrails the local diurnal temperature range (difference of day and night temperatures) was about 1 degree Celsius higher than immediately before;[3] however, it has also been suggested that this was due to unusually clear weather during the period.[4]"


CURE for Global Warming! Just increase the air traffic world-wide to levels like those over the US.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: GUEST, Ebbie
Date: 19 Mar 07 - 04:34 PM

OK,let's say that tha article Peace linked to is right- it sounds knowledgeable, although I don't like its occasional grammatical lapses such as using "lay" for lie and "it's" for you know what - it is high time that we started adapting to the changes. I see no reason for anyone to deny that on a local level events are deteriorating dramatically and I think it is entirely possible that there is a tipping point at which conditions become unsustainable very quickly.

So how do we adapt? Do we let nature take its course, do we give up on and abandon arid continents and lands and their populations? Do we let large animals like polar bears die?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 19 Mar 07 - 07:31 PM

the article states that Stephen Schneider predicted global cooling
due to industrial pollution. In fact he was right about that one too.
Its called global dimming, and scientists noticed a change in the few days after 9/11 when there were no contrails (it was actually hotter during the day) so ironically, reduced industrial pollution over the last 30years or so has actually lessened the global warming...

anyone commenting on past ice ages and solar flux etc. sure the climate has changed in the past ,except over thousands of years, however has there been such a huge increase of c02 in such a short time as in the past century. As for the cost to the economy of reducing green house gases - Germany has been able to implement Kyoto compliance without a huge cost to its economy and it is still paying huge amounts of money to support the former East Germany..

as far as the cost - I dont see anyone worrying about the US military budget (bigger than the next 10 biggest nations combined)

the fact is the writing is on the wall even in the US - the energy companies know there will be carbon trading, and requirements for green or alternative energy, even if it is to reduce dependence on the middle east.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 19 Mar 07 - 10:48 PM

BB

You have once again, cleverly misrepresented my post of 17 Mar 07 - 07:25 AM - I agreed thatthere are OTHER inputs to global warming - which seems to be YOUR sole argument...

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Mar 07 - 06:18 AM

"it sounds knowledgeable, although I don't like its occasional grammatical lapses such as using "lay" for lie and "it's" for you know what - it is high time that we started adapting to the changes."


1. THAT is probable cause to think that the person writing it had a scientifice, rather than literary, background.

2. WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING!!!!!!!!


"You have once again, cleverly misrepresented my post of 17 Mar 07 - 07:25 AM - I agreed thatthere are OTHER inputs to global warming - which seems to be YOUR sole argument... "

Fooles,

You have NOT read my post- MY arguement is that the efforts to LIMIT CO2 emmissions are being presented as a CURE for what will occur regardless. When the global warming DOES cuase problems, there will have been NO effort to deal with it, because "Kyoto" "solved" the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: bubblyrat
Date: 20 Mar 07 - 07:01 AM

Of course, it could just be that there really IS a God, and that He is trying to tell us something !!! I am not a religious man myself, but in my 60 years on this Earth, I have learned NOT to put all my trust and belief in science !!

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Bee
Date: 20 Mar 07 - 08:22 AM

Beardedbruce, hardly anyone thinks Kyoto will 'solve the problem'. The point is to stop making the problem worse, while searching diligently for a better scientific understanding of all the influences on earth's climate. If the house is on fire, what sane person throws gasoline on it?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Mar 07 - 08:25 AM

If a house is on fire, what sane person pisses on it, while ignoring the screams of the children inside?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 20 Mar 07 - 10:27 AM

95% of the scientific climate community disagree with you.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Mar 07 - 12:49 PM

The idea that trying to bring ourselves into harmony with the environment is too expensive rings hollow when you examine the matter. For example, American automobile manufacturers insist that making smaller, more environmentally friendly autos is too costly, and besides, the American consumer doesn't want them. This flies in the face of the facts that General Motors and Ford are having to cut back and lay thousands of people off, and Chrysler is seriously thinking of simply shutting its doors because of backed up inventory—SUVs sitting on showroom floors and in storage that no one wants—while Toyota and Honda, who make small, fuel efficient cars, are swamping them out in sales. Huge numbers of American car buyers are willing to put themselves on a waiting list for three, four, six months to get a Toyota Prius or Honda Insight. Hybrids and other fuel-efficient cars can't be made fast enough to meet the demand for them.

Being environmentally friendly is just good business. But apparently there are a lot of American manufacturers who are not good businessmen.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: GUEST,Ignoramus
Date: 20 Mar 07 - 03:20 PM

I'd love to leave my carbon footprint on Tony Bliars arse!

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 09:31 AM

"Being environmentally friendly is just good business. But apparently there are a lot of American manufacturers who are not good businessmen."

Lots of Aussie W*ankers too...

Look up a company called Suntech. Started by a Chinese guy who loved Australia so much he took out citizenship (still has it!) and discovered several patented things on solar cells while working in Australia. The w*nkers refused to let him develop the technology commercially by manufacturing in China and was laughed at, so he moved to China - with $3million seed capital, he now has a $6billion company and has $3billion personal assets after less than 10 years. he makes solar sells, exported world wide - the Aussie w*nkers have now licenced the patents he developed to a german company... :-) It could have been an Aussie company rather than a Chinese company...

He now is looking at manufacturing in Australia - cheap pure sand - cheap Tassie power, good engineers - and eventually wants to shift Suntech from a manufacturer, to a power generating company. After all Kodak made far more money (for a while) from film than cameras...

He insists that all of his 3,000 employees watch "Saint Al's" movie - he will have 5,000 employees next year...

He sees his life as a 'mission to save the planet' rather than just getting rich...

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 10:42 AM

"Being environmentally friendly is just good business. But apparently there are a lot of American manufacturers who are not good businessmen."

Statements like this tend to assume that your average businessman is a sane, rational human being. If there is one thing that 38 years in industry has taught me it is that many of them are nothing of the sort! And the further up the managerial ladder you go the more arbitrary and egotistical they seem to get. It beats me that ANY modern company makes any money if their chief executives are anything like some of the psychopathic wackos that I have met!

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 12:10 PM

You have to remember that the guys designing and marketing vehicles are also driving them....and most of them can afford to drive 'almost' anything they wish....so it's likely that production of SUVs and such is not totally controlled by 'normal' consumer wishes.

   I really doubt the masses of folks picketed G.M. and Ford, demanding gas-guzzling, polluting monsters. We really need stronger regulations about fuel economy and vehicle size to gradually bring down the total use of fossil fuels, aiming toward alternate ways of powering vehicles. I am not sure price of fuel will do it.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 05:03 PM

"By those like you apparently - those in the choir KNOW we DO have to deal with such resultant disasters whether we stop polluting now and have limited disasters, or push the limits further and have bigger disasters..."


Well, Gore for one is certainly not in YOUR choir.


"Gore -- who is one of voters' top choices for the Democratic presidential nomination even though he says he's not running -- implored lawmakers to adopt a list of policy prescriptions
***************TO STOP GLOBAL WARMING.********************

Fresh off a triumphant Academy Awards appearance in which his climate change documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" won two Oscars, Gore drew overflow crowds as he testified before House and Senate panels about a "true planetary emergency" ******* IF CONGRESS FAILS TO ACT.************ (Read more about Gore's Oscar-night speech)

Gore advised lawmakers to cut carbon dioxide and other warming gases 90 percent by 2050 ******************TO AVOID***************
a crisis. Doing that, he said, will require a ban on any new coal-burning power plants -- a major source of industrial carbon dioxide -- that lack state-of-the-art controls to capture the gases."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/21/gore.ap/index.html

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 05:30 PM

so, Bruce...a slight change of phrasing, being sure to avoid 'stop' and 'avoid' and being sure to use 'reduce' and 'combat' might help reduce the use of asterisks?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 05:42 PM

Bill,

The presentation is being made that cutting co2 emmissions WILL STOP global warming.


THAT is what I was told "ain't so" several times, when I commented on it.

Yes, telling the real truth about it would be useful.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 07:51 PM

I believe "Saint Al" is being misrepresented - he is trying to stop only part of 'global warming' - the percentage that is clearly admitted to be man produced, quite a different thing from trying to stop it all - and doing that will reduce the tendency for global warming to rapidly get out of control - no matter what the cause...

I get the impression that some contributers here, while perhaps not so stupid as to miss the finer points of difference, are deliberately (or perhaps so dumb as to do it unconsciously) trying to muddy the waters so that those who have not yet worked it out for themselves can happily say "It's all too complicated for me - so I'll just keep on the way I am - my little bit won't make any difference!"

I note that the push for all governments to ban incandescent light bulbs is now gaining strength worldwide. There are good arguments for certain uses of incandescent technology in appropriate place - I agree that domestic use in the home is not the best place for them, but incandescents are available for certain uses (such as dimming, projection etc) and in many cases, there is no plug in equivalent, or indeed any appropriate replacement in other technology, such as in colour temperature related applications. 'Halogen' lamps are incandescents too - and will be banned under the current proposals.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 08:00 PM

Well we just had Mr Brown's last budget as chancellor of the exchequer, and once again the bastard has performed his conjuring trick of giving and taking away in one movement.

First analysis suggests that the poorest will get considerably poorer, the middle class will gain, and the rich will lose a tiny amount. Socialism at work again, New Labour Style.

The main problem for me is that I now have a car which will shortly carry a road fund licence burden I cannot afford, and which I cannot sell for the same reason.

When, if ever, will our so called government recognise that for some people, a large car is a necessity. There should be discounts, or even exemptions, where overriding need can be demonstrated.

Perhaps Prescott could be persuaded to give up one of his Jags?...Naaaahh, I thought not.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 08:07 PM

The way to stop ALL global warming is simple. The USA, Russia, Israel, the UK, France, China, India, and Pakistan must pool all their nuclear weapons and place them at a prearranged location to be agreed on by all participants.......like.....hmmm....Belgium? Well, no.... Las Vegas? Worth thinking about.

Well, anyway, they all agree on a location, okay? Then they set off all the nukes simultaneously at the right moment which should be sufficient to jar this planet out of its present orbit and move it a bit farther out from the sun. The planet will cool down almost immediately.

Plus there will be a nuclear winter afterward which will add to the cooling effect.

End of global warming.

It's so simple, I'm surprised that no one else has thought of it.

It would also achieve worldwide nuclear disarmament in one glorious stroke.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 08:12 PM

"This generation has altered the composition of the atmosphere on a global scale through radioactive materials and a steady increase in carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels."

Not Al Gore in 2006 but US President Johnson 41 years earlier (1965!)



"The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences."

Winston Churchill - 1936.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 08:31 PM

Graphic example of the situation:

We have a basin containing water. Through osmosis or whatever process, not clearly understood, water flows into the basin. By a similarly unclear process, water also flows out of the basin. Over time, although the level in the basin rises and falls, so far it has never overflowed.

We have a vested interest in the basin not overflowing. In fact, our lives depend upon it.

Now, we don't understand all of the factors in this ebb and flow and the consequent and apparently periodic rise and fall. We do, however, understand many of the factors.

Within recent years, lots of people—lots of people—have been peeing into the basin. We see the level starting to rise, and it's rising very fast.

Now, there may be other factors involved in the rise.

But, especially considering that if the basin overflows, we can all die, it doesn't seem like a very intelligent thing to keep peeing into the basin!

Comprende?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 10:35 PM

You know, Bruce...you are no doubt correct that 'some' have mis-stated at times the finer points about what reducing CO2..and other measures.. will accomplish. I do not believe I have seen any major players (especially Al Gore) actually claim, under cross examination, that it will ***STOP*** global warming. If there are careless suggestions made that give false impressions, they should be corrected, of course.....but ****NOT**** (my asterisks, I didn't use any of yours!) at the expense of losing the point that human beings are exacerbating the problem!

   You have railed against this little issue until folks were puzzled as to what you were actually upset about. It seems to me that if folks get it thru their heads that they need to BOTH reduce their contribution to the overall problem AND prepare for the possible consequences of the warming in general, all interests will have been served. If we all do the very best we can, maybe those who were overly enthusiastic can be forgiven their little exuberant transgressions, hmmmm?


**************** (I had several asteristics left over....you may have a few if you need them.)

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Peace
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 10:48 PM

There are three places one can put garbage on Earth. In the air, in the water or in the ground.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: pdq
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 10:53 PM

Which one is reresented by Mudcat?

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 11:01 PM

Heh! That would be "air", I think.

Subject: RE: BS: Global warming - the myth
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 22 Mar 07 - 01:40 AM

"There are three places one can put garbage on Earth."


Among the many places...