[Vision2020] Scientific Consensus: Global Warming: Skepticism &

[Tom Hansen]

Speaking of fear-mongering, how about President Bush's reference to World
War III . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00xXKjLpaZ0


Seeya round town, Moscow.

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

"We're a town of about 23,000 with 10,000 college students. The college
students are not very active in local elections (thank goodness!)."

- Dale Courtney (March 28, 2007)

-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of pkraut at moscow.com
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 2:58 PM
To: vision2020 at mail-gw.fsr.net
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Scientific Consensus: Global Warming: Skepticism &

OK but did you see the 2020 episode this last week?? John Stossel talked 
to a group of kids I think about 2dn grade who are all sure we are going 
to die tomorrow from global warming. I know people are aware of the death 
notices from the nuclear fear in the 1950's...hiding under desks and such 
and so for this generation it is the BIG WARM. If it isn't happening 
tomorrow why are they frightning children with the problem?? 



> Paul,
> 
> A few things. 
> 
> First, the folks who see the problem -- primarily scientists -- are not 
the folks 
> who make the laws.
> 
> Second, I don't think folks are suggesting that we'll see the kinds of 
effects
> you suggest in our lifetime. The climatologists I've talked to say it 
likely won't
> happen until our grandchildren, or their children, reach our age. It is 
> hard to predict but what seems certain is that once the real problems 
start
> it will proceed at an exponential rate and we won't be able to do 
anything. 
> 
> This reminds me of the Crabtree debate about when we'll run out of water.
> Suppose it is 200 years, as Krauss suggests. How is that NOT a problem 
NOW?
> Do we have to wait until we are close to running out to do something 
about it?
> Likewise, you would be hard pressed to find a climatologist who does not
> believe that global warming is due, in part, to human behavior -- 
despite what
> Pat says. Why not do whatever we can NOW before it becomes a problem?
> 
> Joe
> 
> ----------------------------- 
>  
> Message: 4 
> Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 10:20:58 -0700 
> From: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> 
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Scientific Consensus: Global Warming: 
> 	Skepticism &Replicatability 
> To: Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com> 
> Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com, J Ford <privatejf32 at hotmail.com> 
> Message-ID: <471B8A7A.1060201 at yahoo.com> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 
>  
> This is what I don't get.  If the problem is as bad as they are saying, 
> which from what I can gather means that I will die of heat prostration 
> or drowning sometime before my natural lifespan would normally arrive, 
> then why are we talking about carbon pricing, low-carbon technologies, 
> and curbing deforestation?  If it's that bad, outlaw coal power plants 
> tomorrow.  Hell, give those companies that own them free money to 
> replace them with the power plant of their choice that uses 
> hydroelectric, wind, solar, geothermal, nuclear, or whatever other kind 
> of greener power plants there are available.  Mandate a total ban on the 
> internal combustion engine starting ten years from now.  Make it illegal 
> to buy a new one, and illegal to import one.  Sign the damned Kyoto 
> protocol and tell the non-complying countries that we'll be nuking their 
> worst polluting plants in 20 years, if they don't dismantle them first.  
> One a day, with the schedule posted on the Internet.  As an added bonus, 
> the particulates sent into the upper atmosphere will help cool our 
> planet down. 
>  
> Or could it be that it's not that bad - but there is a lot of money in 
> crowing about it?  We've been over this ground before, but our biosphere 
> is a complicated set of interacting variables that I don't think we can 
> model that precisely.  However, I would be happy to have our government 
> take every penny that we plan on throwing at Iraq next year and throw it 
> at electric car research instead.  If nothing else, it will make the 
> impact of the Middle East on our country decrease instead of the steady 
> increase we've seen.  Saving our lives later would just be a bonus. 
>  
> Paul 
> 
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>                http://www.fsr.net                       
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
> 




---------------------------------------------
This message was sent by First Step Internet.
           http://www.fsr.com/


=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================