--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley" > <j_alexander_stanley@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Alex: aren't you HAPPY that the melting glaciers are the result > of a > > > volcanoe? If true, that would mean that global warming is NOT > man- > > > made and that we will NOT all die a horrible death like Al Gore > wants > > > us to believe. > > > > > > Aren't you excited about the possibility that the concept of man- > made > > > catastrophic global warming is all bunk? > > > > Personally, I have no position on global warming, one way or the > > other. It just struck me that you were posting this story as some > kind > > of blanket debunking of global warming, when a quick check of Google > > news shows that this story is about a localized phenomenon that does > > not explain glacial melting elsewhere. So, I posted that snippet for > > balance and accuracy. > > > I find that strange, Alex, and, yes, hard to believe. > > We have been told by Al Gore that millions and millions will die if > catastrophic man-made global warming continues. And you have no > position on it one way or the other?
If Samantha Stevens, right this instant, could twitch her nose and instantly tinka-tinka-tee away all usage of fossil fuels on earth, the CO2 that is in the atmosphere right now will continue to be there for many decades to come. And, in reality, mankind is not going to stop using fossil fuels any time soon. So, if man's contribution to atmospheric CO2 *can* cause catastrophe, then it's inevitably *going* to cause catastrophe because it's too late to stop it. My getting all caught up in emotional drama over global warming isn't going to remedy the situation, so I simply choose to not focus on it. > How can you be neutral on something that potentially can devastate > mankind? For one, I'm tired of living in fear, whether it's Al Gore and global warming or the GOP and its Islamofascism boogeyman, so I tend to tune out trendy fear memes. And, I'm also aware of how the scientific community at large is very capable of glomming onto information cascades of utterly bogus concepts, like Ancel Keys' lipid hypothesis that has most people terrified of saturated fats and cholesterol and believing they need to pop statin drugs and eat refined garbage like soybean and canola oils. > At the very least I would think that you would feel at least a > LITTLE relieved that there is information that holds out hope > that the dire warnings are wrong. I don't know whether or not you edited the article you posted, but it did not convey the totality of that story. Any feeling of relief from what you posted would have as its foundation the omission of facts that were reported in more thorough coverage of that same story.
