[Vision2020] : Al Gore's "Lie" Breaks Record Relevance?

[Megan Prusynski]

Dave-

Well said. :) It's good to know that some people are paying attention.

Anyone that has any respect for life (all life - because that is  
really what is at stake here) can't deny that global warming, our  
abuse of the planet, and our polluting habits can't seriously be  
considered progress or morally sound. I believe that we can evolve to  
live in harmony, both with each other and the earth, that we can act  
now with the knowledge we have and turn things around... am I too  
much of an optimist?

"Humankind has not woven the web of life. Whatever we do to the web,  
we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things are  
connected" ~Chief Seattle

Everything is connected. It's obvious global warming is big and our  
lifestyles are not sustainable, denial is only slowing us down and  
sealing our doom...

Change is good.  :)

~megan




On Mar 1, 2007, at 8:52 PM, vision2020-request at moscow.com wrote:

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 03:06:24 +0000
> From: "david sarff" <davesway at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Al Gore's 'Lie' Breaks Records Relevance?
> To: deco at moscow.com, vision2020 at moscow.com
> Message-ID: <BAY135-F129569C88F28A6F4E72339C5870 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>
>
> Will Rogers said  “We’re all ignorant , just about different stuff”
>
> I think its pretty wild that a bunch of folks are putting on like Gore
> invented Global Warming. Their accusation of him was not  
> comprehensively
> weighed. There are too many people that seem to find comfort in  
> their denial
> with just a limited number of questionable sources and tiny bits of  
> support.
> It especially sets me back when members connected to the Ag  
> community, who
> are absolutely dependent on science ( of which climatology is a  
> part) to
> support our present ag structure, long knowing the level of production
> losses that can occur with just a few degrees of average climate  
> change.
> Even potential lowering the carrying capacity of the earth at this  
> stage in
> human history is absolutely nothing to pooh pooh. Our collective  
> belt is
> getting tight.
> We have never had 6.5 billion humans with ravenous appetites for  
> far more
> than just food and housing along with so much soil exposed and  
> something
> like 2% of citizens in our own country practicing the task of  
> growing the
> food. There is really nothing in all of human existence to compare  
> this too.
> The food support pyramid is upside down with one farmer on the  
> bottom and
> the masses at the top. Where have we done that in ancient history.
> If we loose ag production it’s not going to be made up by farming the
> exposed Greenland soils or Canadian tundra turf.  Talk about going  
> back to
> the stone ages. That is exactly what those of us concerned about  
> this wish
> to avoid.
> My view is that we simply include in our accounting the cost of  
> carbon per
> pound emitted. ( something not included by even our local save the  
> buss
> group) Our markets will adjust to that. We could be creating jobs and
> increasing manufacture closer to home because of it. Making shirts,  
> shoes
> and boxes of cold cereal more locally. We will be living in self  
> heating and
> self cooling homes and utilizing resources as we always have, only  
> with
> greater excellence. Driving the most technologically advanced  
> vehicles.
> This is not anti economy or growth. It is in fact a vast  
> opportunity to
> improve living for us all, and not just here, but globally.
> People can call this a hoax, the apocalypse, or the fuzzy edge of a  
> horizon
> event leading into a technological singularity. But something is  
> going down,
> its big, and not acting to move forward is out of the question.
> Dave
>
>
>> To avoid getting confused by charlatans on the global warming  
>> issue, there
>> are two fundamental questions to ask yourself:
>>
>> 1.    Is global warming occurring at the present time?
>>
>> 2.    If so, how much has human activity contributed to such warming?
>>
>>
>>
>> 1.    The amount of evidence supporting the hypothesis that global  
>> warming
>> is occurring is formidable.  Over the last 50 years the average air
>> temperature computed by considering the temperature from thousands of
>> different worldwide points has undeniably risen.  Glacial and ice  
>> mass melt
>> has far outstripped glacial and ice mass growth worldwide.  The  
>> ocean level
>> has risen.
>>
>> One of the sources cited in the last post from
>> news.of.christ.cult at gamil.com is a National Geographic Magazine  
>> article.
>> It has pictures for those not able or willing to read words:
>> Link to National Geographic Society Story  The visual evidence is  
>> quite
>> impressive.  On the local level, those of us who have visited/ 
>> hiked in the
>> Canadian Rockies over the last 50 years have seen the dramatic  
>> decrease of
>> glacial mass firsthand.
>>
>> There is other evidence from changes in the ranges of biota  
>> worldwide.
>> Only a few skeptics deny that global warming has been occurring.
>>
>>
>> 2.    The debate over global warming is really not whether it is  
>> occurring
>> or not, but what are the causes, how much is caused by human  
>> activity, and
>> what effects could humans have on reversing the trend.
>>
>> A synopsis of the almost unanimous scientific community can be  
>> found here:
>> IPCC:  The Physical Basis of Climate Change
>> It is not light reading.
>>
>> Of course, there are a few quasi-scientific dissenters.  That is  
>> true of
>> almost any current, edge of knowledge scientific theory, including  
>> the
>> theory of gravity (yes, even at this late date after we have use  
>> it to send
>> to and retrieve persons from the moon), and the theories of the  
>> structure
>> of matter.  One of the main arguments for hypothesizing the human  
>> causation
>> part of global warming is the vastly increased amounts of atmospheric
>> carbon oxide.
>>
>> Human activity is now producing much more of this gas than ever  
>> before.  In
>> addition, the natural control of carbon dioxide, plant  
>> photosynthesis, has
>> been reduced since massive amounts of the larger of this kind of  
>> vegetation
>> has been destroyed in the last 200 years, a great deal of it in  
>> the last 50
>> years (Amazon forests, e.g.).  Not only does the destruction of this
>> vegetation reduce carbon dioxide intake and control, but it also  
>> causes
>> climatic changes.
>>
>> Critics of global warming like to point out that there are natural  
>> climatic
>> cycles lasting thousand of years.  That is true.
>>
>> The last ice age ended about 10,000 years ago.  Since shortly  
>> after that,
>> average world air temperatures have been relatively stable until  
>> about 50
>> years ago, whence they started to climb.  [Although there were not  
>> weather
>> stations until the 19th century, there are ways to estimate  
>> accurately
>> basic world climatic conditions/temperatures in the past.]   
>> Proponents of
>> the hypothesis that humans are now contributing much more than  
>> ever to
>> global warming point to this sudden temperature upswing in  
>> conjunction with
>> the vast increase of human carbon dioxide production.
>>
>>
>> As a side note, I find it amusing that biblical inerrantists like Ed
>> Iverson and his ilk argue against human causation of global  
>> warming partly
>> on the basis of past ice ages that apparently started over two  
>> billion
>> years ago.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_ages
>>
>> According to the Bible, the alleged God thereof created the earth  
>> less than
>> 7,000 years ago.  Do the math and draw your own conclusions about  
>> Iverson's
>> theories, expertise, and even basic arithmetical and logical ability.
>>
>>
>> Ted Moffett and others have posted evidence about the global  
>> warming crisis
>> here on V 2020.  They cite not only the scientific hypotheses, but  
>> the
>> factual basis for them.  Critics of the theory frequently cite  
>> only a small
>> bit of the evidence, and like their cousins, the creationists,  
>> really only
>> show their ignorance of the facts and theory in total.
>>
>> In small, I like to compare of those who exhort us not to take global
>> warming seriously with another group -- those realtors and  
>> developers in
>> parts of southern California who promised that building large,  
>> heavy houses
>> on steep hillsides would cause no problems in the future.  This  
>> greedy
>> group even produced a few whorish, but hardly competent geologists to
>> support their views.  Unless you live in a cave, you know what  
>> happens
>> every year to some of these houses.  What you may not know is that  
>> you pay
>> for such folly because those losses impact your home owner's  
>> insurance
>> costs even though the losses did not occur in this area.  Apply  
>> the same
>> thinking to global warming and include the likely effects on your  
>> line of
>> progeny.
>>
>>
>> W.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070302/2af75cdd/attachment-0001.html