Need to know????

[Jason1]

Originally Posted by mlarson

It will only cause severe brain cramps.

You got that right, I need 10 Advil listening to him on a good day.

[George A. H. Luck]

"You got that right, I need 10 Advil listening to him on a good day."

Always tolerant of other viewpoints I see. Do you listen to him often?

[Michael Larson]

George, I think jason1 tries to listen to other points of view than his own but it hurts so much that he runs out of Advil quickly.

[Jason1]

Originally Posted by gluck

Always tolerant of other viewpoints I see. Do you listen to him often?

I do actually, I find him entertaining, even though I think he is full of it most days

[George A. H. Luck]

It was a very interesting programme. Lots of thought provoking information. One of the really interesting issues was that the increase in C02 always lags behind any increase in temperature. This is supported by the geological and ice core record. ( Google it. I did.) Pretty hard to blame so - called global warming on C02. Must be something else. Increased solar radiation? NAAHHH! Our C02 is polluting the other planets that are also heating up at the same time but at an increased rate.

So much for moving to Mars!
</IMG>

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by gluck

It was a very interesting programme. Lots of thought provoking information.

Here is a transcript of the program for those interested. TRANSCRIPT

[Michael Larson]

IPCC WG1 AR4 Final Report Now Avaiable

LINKS Page

Lets's see if the MSM spends as much time detailing teh science in the reports as they did with the Summary for Policy Makers

[Jason1]

Originally Posted by mlarson

IPCC WG1 AR4 Final Report Now Avaiable

LINKS Page

Lets's see if the MSM spends as much time detailing teh science in the reports as they did with the Summary for Policy Makers

To quote:

Since the start of the industrial era (about 1750),

the overall effect of human activities on climate has been a warming
influence. The human impact on climate during this era greatly
exceeds that due to known changes in natural processes, such as

solar changes and volcanic eruptions




Still think man isn't a problem, Mike?

What witty argument will you come up to dispute the scientific facts put forward by hundreds of educated men?

[wforsyth]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Maybe it's time to attack Canada so we can take their oil too.

When ever I think of "good ole GW" and and become dismayed I just think of what might have been with Al Gore or John Kerry.
Then I feel much much better.

That's what I do.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by Jason1

To quote:


Since the start of the industrial era (about 1750),
the overall effect of human activities on climate has been a warming
influence. The human impact on climate during this era greatly
exceeds that due to known changes in natural processes, such as

solar changes and volcanic eruptions




Still think man isn't a problem, Mike?

What witty argument will you come up to dispute the scientific facts put forward by hundreds of educated men?

I have listed many other "educated men" with a different point of view but you have little regard for them. You should ask yourself why that is. Clue-Science and facts are not areas where majority rules.

jason1,
Fact is all men could die tomorrow and the climate would still change. Sometimes up and sometimes down.
Then who would be here to save anything?

[Jason1]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Fact is all men could die tomorrow and the climate would still change. Sometimes up and sometimes down.

You fail to see the difference between natural climate cycles and mans place in them. We are contributing to a the process, which in turn is making it worse then it would normally be.

It is good to objective Mike, but really how long can you hold up your flimsy arguments?


</IMG>

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by Jason1

You fail to see the difference between natural climate cycles and mans place in them.

Huh?
Man's place in them is to adapt to the always changing environment. For example:If the sea rises above it's current level(as it has before) people will adapt by modifying the shore or moving to higher ground. That's is unless you hold to the stupid people theory.

Originally Posted by Jason1

We are contributing to a the process, which in turn is making it worse then it would normally be.

The questions remain-
What percentage?
What is 'normal'
Who determines normal?

Originally Posted by Jason1

It is good to objective Mike, but really how long can you hold up your flimsy arguments?

What are the "flimsy" arguments?

[Jason1]

Originally Posted by mlarson

The questions remain-
What percentage?
What is 'normal'
Who determines normal?

http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html

[Michael Larson]

As you may remember jason1, I am not disputing the climate change is happening though our personal frame of reference is so small as to be insignificant.

One of my contentions is that any money spent to mitigate said change is poorly spent.

If people are truly concerned with saving humans from real pain and suffering there are so many good things that could be done.

Instead there is little more than a political agenda being foisted on the populous.
It's generally anti-western, mostly anti-U.S.A., and definitely lead by those who would prefer a lot of us to be gone. They are willing to limit freedom, increase the cost of living, tax us to oblivion and mandate how we live, all for their unstated goals. They vastly underestimate Man's ability and desire to adapt to his environment. They are self anointed purveyors of a new religion that demands fidelity to the tenets of their faith.
They have been effective in promoting their agenda in schools, churches and government and aided along the way by willing media that loves to promote a crisis-any crisis-and is often unwilling to investigate and present a balanced view of the issue so that people can make rational decisions. Instead they are fed a near constant diet of warning, doom, and gloom.
JMO

[Jason1]

Originally Posted by mlarson

JMO

Thankfully.