On 1/18/2013 12:48 AM, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/17/2013 7:11 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/17/2013 7:28 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Alberto G. Corona
<agocor...@gmail.com <mailto:agocor...@gmail.com>> wrote:
You have to prove that the CO2 is the main ingredient of global
warming. Not me.
Ok. So Greenhouse effect is "alarmist fantasy" to you. This makes
things clearer.
But it is not. It is water vapor by orders of magnitude. And
the water vapor concentration, and the clouds depends on cosmic
rays, and cosmic rays depend on solar activity and the variation
on the earth orbit. The hockey stick (false) is of temperatures.
And temperatures are falling now, like were falling in the 70s.
The most likely evolution is towards a new ice age, as you can
see clearly in the graphic.
CO2 do no predict increase of temperatures, it is just
the contrary You can verify that in the graphic. increase of
temperature precedes CO2 increase. This is caused by the
increased erosion or carbonate rocks in the litosphere and the
liberation of CO2 by oceans when temperature raises. The causes
of the cycles that you see in the graphic are due to the orbit
of earth around the sun, there is no CO2 causation but the
opposite. the correlation exist, but the causation is just the
reverse to the promoted by the alarmists.
Natural sources of CO2 exceed the antropogenic production by
orders of magnitude. a single eruption can produce more CO2 than
the entire human population in a year.
You're right in that it's naturally messy enough.
But so what? 313 ppm in 1960 to 390 ppm in 2010, with current
measured amount of CO2 exceeding geological maximum values; I just
don't see the logic of adding to this mindlessly by burning more
black stuff. I do see the plausibility of shooting for long term
energy solutions that add, burn, or otherwise muck around with the
fragile global ecology, our only home at the moment, less. And I'm
open to all of it, hemp prominently included, provided that we
burn/waste less in the long run.
No final solutions. These problems will not leave, regardless of our
capacity to deny infinitely.
PGC
------
PGC,
Your making a straw man argument, mate! Even if we stipulate as a
fact that "...current measured amount of CO2 exceeding geological
maximum values", this does nothing to force decisions such as how not
to "muck around with the fragile global ecology". It is the home of
all of us, not jush some elite few that wish the rest us us to stop
breathing. I have read the papers of the alarmist with eyes wide
open, there is lots of discussion of how to "reduce populations" and
so forth. There is even chatter about "crimes against nature"
tribunals for those that "deny the consensus science".
How about some actual quotes and citations - lest we suspect you of
creating a straw man.
Brent
Try http://www.worldwatch.org/node/563 and
http://www.amazon.com/Crimes-Against-Nature-Corporate-Plundering/dp/B008SLYJ8C
I really don't have time to do what you should be doing for yourself.
--
Onward!
Stephen
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
