Good afternoon Kirk, A few commments:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The major source of influence is the output of the sun. if you mean that the only source of input energy to the earth is the sun, then yes, I agree. But if you're somehow trying to rule out the constituent makeup of the atmosphere as having much to do with anything I am baffled as to your reasoning. > Also weather does not constitute climate change. > I'm not sure what you mean by this either. <snip> > If the atmosphere was an Olympic size swimming pool full of vodka > the fluorocarbon concentration would be the same as taking an > eyedropper and adding a drop of Vermouth. > Mighty dry Martini. Ok, first of all, a real martini is made with gin, not vodka. Second, WOAH slow down and be careful about your metaphores. I know you've mostly been making refference to the hole in the Ozone, but I've read other's comments here on the general topic of global climate change and wanted to throw out a few considerations to illustrate that what you are trying to imply is a gross oversimplification. CO2 is one of the most commonly discussed greenhouse gases. It has the capacity to capture and store a large amount of IR radiation and is one of the gasses in our atmosphere which keeps us from freezing to death. Methane, partly because of its greater structural complexity, has something like an order of magnitude or more capacity for storing IR radiation( as in your sheep david really MAY be the problem, but more likely it's all the beef we idiot yanks eat). Hydroflourocarbons have something like two orders of magnitude more capacity. I.E. much smaller quantities have much higher capacity for energy storage. I am not a climate scientist and am not aware of what the other factors are which play a part in our planets equilibrium. I am, however, quite aware that there are many many many factors and that these things are debated hotly. I know for a fact that making oversimplified metaphores never helps, especially when used to attempt to contradict widely held beliefs in the scientific community. > If you read the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx you see elimination of > private property as one of the planks. > Eco-crises is being promoted as a vehicle to that end. > Hysteria is being used as a motivational tool. > > Kirk I'm sorry, I missed that. was that hysteria over ecological problems being used to shove communism down our throats, or hysteria over communism being used to justify selfishness and craming of heads in the sand? -andrew Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
