So, there we go.
Whatever you think, there will be someone who disagrees, and the scientific
evidence can be interpreted in multiple ways.
Therefore, there is no scientific consensus.
And we are, as a planet, going to spend billions on solving the problem.
However, another issue - one over there is no scientific dispute - is likely
to sink due to the lack of a tiny fraction of that funding.
The one natural hazard that is not in dispute, and the only one that puts
the future of our species at risk, is likely to remain unresolved due to
lack of funding.
Near Earth Objects are a bit of a problem. We can fix that problem. So why
don't we bother?
Jay Tate
The Spaceguard Centre
http://www.spaceguarduk.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael L Blood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Marc Fries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Meteorite List"
<meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Global Warming - Scientifically proven ora
farce
on 6/10/07 9:53 AM, Marc Fries at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If your only source is "An Inconvenient Truth", then I'm not
surprised to see you go straight to the "anyone who doesn't think as
I do is an idiot" approach.
------
No, Marc,
As clearly outlined below, in my original post I NUMBERED
4 examples I consider to be rather overwhelming evidence.
The documentary to which you refer was THE LAST of 4 of
the examples given (see my original post below). How you can
pick out the last example given and pronounce it as "your only
source" is beyond me and so clearly distorting of what I said I
really don't see any point in taking further part in a dialog so
emotionally charged people can't even read what has been
stated.
I feel like I am attempting to communicate with the
administration prior to the hurricane that flooded New Orleans.
If people don't want to hear something, they just don't want to
hear it.
How people manage to make this out to be a "political
issue" is beyond me and I, personally, have no further need
to discuss it within such a context. It would be just as productive
to debate evolution with a fundamentalist committed to
creationism.
Since people perceive this (though I don't know how)
as a "left wing conspiracy" let's just leave it behind. Such
attitudes make any attempts at scientific debate an impossibility.
Best wishes, Michael
On Jun 9, 2007, at 10:12 PM, Michael L Blood wrote:
Hi Rob,
I am usually able to waylay any strong feelings posts
might arouse in me. However, when talking about the survival
of not only everyone I love, but of the majority of life forms on
the planet it becomes a little more difficult for me to keep my
feelings in check. However, I will try.
I strongly suggest that if you have ANY belief in the
scientific process at all that you examine the following:
1) The history and current movement WORLD WIDE by
the vast majority of scientists as expressed in the United
Nations .... After years of denial of scientific evidence, finally
a treaty was negotiated in Kyoto, Japan in December 1997.
Of the 173 recognized countries on the planet, only 3 were
and continue to be "hold outs" - of course, under King George,
the US is one of them.
(Clinton was guilty in spite of the urging of his vice
president, as he always, always, always pursued the action
that was politically most "favorable")
From this you can see that 98.3% of the various countries
have chosen to head the warnings of their scientists on this matter.
That's just flat-out wrong. The Kyoto accords were rejected in this
country not by Bush or even Clinton, but by the US Congress that
voted unanimously (95-0, i.e. both Dems and Republicans) to reject
it. It is a poorly thought-out document that was drafted literally
in a matter of hours, and it treats the US economy as if it were no
different than, say, Denmark's. It also neglects a vast proportion
of the world's pollution by excluding "developing" nations such as
Iran and China, both of which have air pollution problems that are
simply horrific. Congress was right to reject it. We need a global
agreement that is based on the input of scientists, economics experts
and other qualified personnel, and not on the currently trendy fad of
anti-American sentiment.
2) Do at least a LITTLE research on the scientific reports that
were requested by and sent to the current administration - and
then ALTERED by said administration & the number of former
advisors who have resigned as a result of the bull headed refusal
of the administration to accept the truth, even when research
was conducted by their own scientific advisors.
Again, this is flat-out wrong. You're placing your political bias
above scientific reasoning, just as "An Inconvenient Truth" does. As
a scientist who has examined the data impartially, I can attest that
the case for global warming as a man-made event has not been made.
We have temperature and CO2 measurements from the past ~100,000 years
thanks to ice cores from Antarctica and Greenland (which match each
other almost perfectly) that show that atmospheric CO2 cannot
possibly cause global warming independent of other factors, otherwise
we would have seen a 3-4 degree celcius rise worldwide in the past
few decades alone. As it is, the world's temperature has changed by
about 1 degree, which may well be in tempo with the natural rise in
temperature that has occurred since the end of the last ice age. See
for yourself:
http://www.daviesand.com/Choices/Precautionary_Planning/New_Data/
Note especially: "The present mean temperature is about +.8C. Recent
peak temperatures have been in the +1.4C to +1.6C range."
Other aspects of the claim of CO2 alteration of global temperature
are unproven, most importantly a change in oceanic carbonate
precipitation which as far as I can tell simply hasn't been
measured. Additionally, to this day we cannot state with certainty
an answer to the very basic question of whether historic changes in
Earth's temperature are the result of atmospheric, oceanic or solar
effects. Simply put, we're not smart enough at present to say what
causes planetary climate change, and to state otherwise is
scientifically misleading if not outright fraud.
As far as " the bull headed refusal of the administration to accept
the truth, even when research was conducted by their own scientific
advisors.", let me remind you of one of the adminstration's own
advisors in the form of the head of NASA, who earlier this week
stated that he isn't convinced that global warming is caused by
humans or that it is something we can change. Now consider this -
who should have the voice with the greater weight on this subject, a
career planetary scientist, or a politician with a long history of
inventing "scientific agreement" on controversial subjects in order
to win votes (see Gore's previous behavior in producing the National
Nanotechnology Initiative, which has washed his hands of in the past
few years)?
3) See Burk's "Before the Warming" (Made in the early 1990s,
it is scary how exactly, as scientifically predicted, the results
of global warmiing have progressed thus far.
That's one source. There are many. Even better, the raw data is
available for your analysis (see my link above) since we live in the
"information age" and all.
4) See "An Inconvenient Truth."
I am confident that you are intelligent and sane enough
that, once having reflected upon the above, any reluctance to
see the evidence in this matter will be gone.
If, after reviewing the above, anyone remains unconvinced,
I suggest they buy an ostrich ranch as that way they will be
among those who are equally like minded and scientifically
aware.
Sincerely, Michael Blood
This is one scientist who 1) isn't going to resort to personal
attacks and 2) isnt' going to buy an ostrich farm or contribute to
Gore's campaign anytime soon.
Cheers,
MDF
on 6/9/07 2:41 PM, Rob McCafferty at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This post simply underlines a theory I had presented
to me 10 years ago, that global warming is just a
phase.
If as little as 13000 years ago, the sahara was
watered grassland, and the sahara grew before
industry, how likely that we are the influence of
climate change?
I do not work for Shell, BP, Xxon, etc. I Just think
that humans have an over-inflated opinion of their
significance.
Even so, I will confess to actively reducing my carbon
footprint over the last 2 years.
Sorry, I know it's not met related.
Rob McC
--- "Sterling K. Webb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi, Tom, List
Dean Bessey used to (may yet) sell neolithic
arrowheads from NWA. Most are probably 9000 to
13,000 years old, from the time that the Sahara
was a well-watered grassland with scattered forest
stands and lots of big game, well illustrated in
the rock drawings the neolithic peoples left behind:
http://images.google.com/images?gbv=2&hl=en&safe=off&q=
+site:images.jupiterima
ges.com+petroglyphs+sahara
You just got a freebie.
Sterling K. Webb
----------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 11:35 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Arrow head found in box of
Moroccan
Meteoritefragments.
Hi List, You all will think I am nuts. I was
going through a box of small
meteorite fragments sorting out interesting pieces
and attractive
individuals. It was out of 20 Kg. small stuff, all
unsorted and very dirty
and I found
an arrow head. Nice shape. About 1 inch total
length.
Are there any arrow heads found in the region where
meteorites would be
shipped from Morocco?
Thanks, Tom
************************************** See what's
free at
http://www.aol.com.
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
_____________________________________________________________________
_________
______
Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're
surfing.
http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/index.php
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
--
If You Want a Nation Ruled By Religion, Move to Iran
--
Success is not counted by how high you have climbed but by how
many people you brought with you. Anonymous
--
I have given two cousins to war and I stand
ready to sacrifice my wife's brother.
Artemus Ward
--
--
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
--
If You Want a Nation Ruled By Religion, Move to Iran
--
Success is not counted by how high you have climbed but by how
many people you brought with you. Anonymous
--
I have given two cousins to war and I stand
ready to sacrifice my wife's brother.
Artemus Ward
--
--
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/842 - Release Date: 09/06/2007
10:46
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
