<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;"><DIV>Paul,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>How would you <SPAN>predict</SPAN> the Republicans response to a Democratic proposal to exchange oil and mineral rights, and passage rights in the North Pole for $10 billion to use to pay down the deficit? They could also cut military funding for protection of the northern area of the United States.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If they really believed global warming was a myth, then it would be a good deal considering the north passage would not be passable if there is no global warming, and the minerals are also inaccessible anyway. On the other hand, if it is true, it would show Republicans as bad investors. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It would force Republicans to put their money where their mouth is.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Your Friend,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Donovan Arnold</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR>--- On <B>Thu, 2/11/10, Paul <SPAN>Rumelhart</SPAN> <I><godshatter@yahoo.com></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><BR>From: Paul <SPAN>Rumelhart</SPAN> <godshatter@yahoo.com><BR>Subject: [Vision2020] Snow storms and global warming<BR>To: "vision 2020" <Vision2020@moscow.com><BR>Date: Thursday, February 11, 2010, 8:33 PM<BR><BR>
<DIV class=plainMail>I've seen lots of articles on the web that describe how the current record-breaking weather on the East Coast does not disprove global warming. Here is a sampling:<BR><BR><A href="http://mediamatters.org/research/201002090032" target=_blank>http://mediamatters.org/research/201002090032</A><BR><A href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/no_the_snow_does_not_disprove.html" target=_blank>http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/no_the_snow_does_not_disprove.html</A><BR><A href="http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/12/cold-snap-global-warming/" target=_blank>http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/12/cold-snap-global-warming/</A><BR><BR>I don't dispute this. I'm pretty sure that global warming is happening on larger timescales; I am just skeptical of the anthropogenic component being as powerful a forcing as climate scientists and political leaders would like us to believe. <BR><BR>It does lead me to wonder
about one thing, though. What kind of a winter would it take to disprove global warming?<BR><BR>A mild winter would likely be blamed on the overall temperature increase, where a stormy winter would likely be blamed on there being more moisture in the air and more energy in the system. Would a winter that was average in all ways be enough? Since winters vary so much over the years, what would a completely average winter look like? Would it take a winter that lasted all year? If it's likely that no winter that could reasonably be expected to occur would disprove it, then is it meaningful to say that the current weather was predicted by the AGW hypothesis?<BR><BR>I've also been pondering the role of moisture in global temperature. If the moisture content of the air is indeed increasing, wouldn't that mean more snowfall and more clouds? Both of which change the albedo of the Earth a significant amount which would
cause more sunlight to be reflected back into space. Would this serve as a negative feedback process? From what I've read, the affect on clouds on global warming is one of the biggest open-ended questions out there right now.<BR><BR>Just curious what other people thought.<BR><BR>Paul<BR><BR>=======================================================<BR>List services made available by First Step Internet, <BR>serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <BR> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A> <BR> mailto:<A href="http://us.mc447.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Vision2020@moscow.com"
ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================<BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></td></tr></table><br>