On Jun 25, 7:43?am, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 21:36:27 -0700, Chuck Gould





wrote:
On Jun 24, 6:31?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

Ah yes - I see.

It's all our fault.

~~ yawn ~~

wrote:
I don't know how much of it, if any, is mankind's fault--- but the
results will definitely be mankind's problem

It may not be all our fault. May not any of it be our fault. My point
all along is that this is a scientific issue that is still open to
debate. That debate should be scientific, not political.

Pointing out the 10-15% of scientists who disagree with the herd and
pointing out instances when some scientist or another was wrong about
previous climate predictions won't erase the very real possibility
that there's a problem. That was the basis of my "dueling websites"
comment. Everbody could link to hundreds of sites on both sides of th
issues, some of them prepared by people with exceptional scientific
credentials that exceed even those of Sean Hannity, Al Gore, or Rush
Limbaugh. :-)

Way back in the days of yore....there was one lonely voice crying out
that the earth revolved around the sun. All the evidence available at
that time and popularly accepted by the established religious and
political powers seemed to indicate that the earth was the
geographical "center" of the universe. That one lonely voice was
right...

One side or the other in the global warming debate is right. I don't
know which it is, and you don't either. The three main questions a

1. Is the climate changing? Almost any reasonable person would have to
answer yes because the climate has always been in a state of change
for as far back as we can detect.

2. If the climate is changing, is it changing differently or more
rapidly than it has in the past?

3. If the climate is changing differently or more rapidly than in the
past, is there something man should do or should stop doing as a
result?

The tough aspect is that it's going to take 100 years to know who's
right about climate change.....and in the meantime it's silly (IMO) to
get all worked up on a personal basis or start characterizing people
who disagree with your personal guess on the issue as a bunch of bad
guys.

Chuck, I cannot understand why the folks talking the most about mankind's
contribution to global warming are the same ones fighting the use of
nuclear energy. Ah yes, there is a waste problem. But, it is minimal, given
the recycling technology, compared to the advantages of nuclear energy.

Perhaps this is one of the reasons many folks think the liberals are
'crying wolf' more than actually trying to solve the problem. Of course,
with folks like Al Gore, the whole issue is a money-making proposition.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I don't believe "the liberals" or anybody else can solve the problem
at this point. First we have to reach a broad agreement, based solely
on scientific evidence and not talk show or political rhetoric,
whether the problem exists and whether human activities contribute to
it. If we decide that there is a dire problem and that human influence
is making the situation much worse, then we should be prepared to take
whatever steps are required.

Right now we have group one: "There's no such thing as global warming.
It's a liberal conspiracy to make George Bush look bad. And even if
there is, my personal consumption of fossil fuels and other resources
absolutely has nothing to do with it at all."

And we're got group two: "The planet is heating up so quickly due to
the production of excess greenhouse gas by industry and consumers that
we're all doomed to a miserable fate. Life as we know it may end in
the next couple of decades. We need to park our cars, unplug our
lightbulbs and computers, turn off the heating and air conditioning,
and return to living in caves."

The earth doesn't give a darn about political or personal opinions,
and if there is a problem we should be prepared to take realistic and
practical steps in response. Extermism on either side of the issue,
before conclusive evidence is at hand, serves nobody. Extremism will
only forestall the implementation of corrective measures if it becomes
evident that corrections are required.

Boaters should be concerned about this debate more than many other
groups. We are more dependent upon winds and weather, which can be
altered significantly by a major climate change. We are also more at
risk for having our recreational activities black-listed by folks
seeking ways that *others* should sacrifice to promote a healthy
environment.