"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Jeff Rigby wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m...9/ixworld.html

It appears that one of the legacies of the Clinton administration is
that global warming stopped in 1998.

Raising hand I have a question! Are you the opinion that there
could never be any information which would convince you that we *are*
contributing to global warming, and might want to change a few living
habits?
There is no information at this time that would convince me that global
warming is a man made phenomena.
You might be right, or you might be wrong. However, here's an analogy.
Your doctor says you have a brain tumor. You tell him won't believe it's
dangerous until he shows you a petri dish on his desk containing a
tumor, from your head, the size of a bran muffin. Of course, by that
time, you'd be so messed up that you won't be able to comment on what
you're seeing.

No, the analogy should be; You have headaches and one doctor says you
have a brain tumor even though it doesn't show up on a CT scan, "it's too
small" says the doctor "to show up on a scan at this time but it will
kill you if left untreated". You go for a second opinion and that doctor
asks about your lifestyle, does and in-depth study and concludes that
it's probably related to your job as an amusement ride inspector but to
be on the safe side you should get a CT scan every 6 months for 2 years
to be sure. You can't quit your job ( you have a family to support) so
you follow the second doctors advice.

Doug, you call the second doctor a quack when that IS the reasonable
choice. The first doctor MAY be right but the evidence is not all in.
There may be a tumor caused by insult but it's not going to be malignant,
it's not going to grow or metastasize.


Interesting, but if certain posters here (and I am not hinting you are one
of those) claimed there was no connection between the activities of man
and global warming, I would dismiss those claims out of hand because of
the demonstrated pigheadedness and stupidity of those posters, and the
fact that they have their heads stuck up the butts of the US Chamber of
Commerce.

All things being equal the eco systems of the earth can handle increased
carbon dioxide in the air, in fact life will flourish as plants take up this
nutrient and algae and plants become more prolific. Short term we might
have a moderate increase in temperature, nothing like the 8 degree swings of
the past before we were a factor in planetary terms.

We should all be much more concerned with the OTHER pollutants like lead,
mercury, cadmium, radium and others that are going into the atmosphere from
coal fired power plants. As far as I am concerned the coal plants can
produce MORE carbon dioxide if they can eliminate the heavy metals from the
stack.

The global warming scare is a political shell game, it's crap.....Everyone's
attention is diverted from the REAL issues.

Harry, tell me why NO-ONE is concerned about these poisons. Why the
attention to a benign gas that IS part of the life cycle. IS NECESSARY for
life to flourish.... and no attention to elements that are not a part of the
life cycle, that pollute the food chain and KILL higher forms of life.

Do you think you are being manipulated Harry....think about it.... I know
we are and it makes me angry!