And there were no suv's and powerplants and factories before the last
ice age...

markvictor wrote:
And there were no suv's and powerplants and factories before the last
ice age...

and Thank-You, wise Sir Bedevere for _your_ insightful observations

No, but the rational for limiting greenhouse gasses in what history
now shows us to be a very chaotic and unstable atmosphere subject to
sudden dramatic changes is similar to not smoking in a room full of
open gas cans. Your cigarette may not set them off and they may go
off by themselves but, why risk it?

--

Roger Long



"markvictor" wrote in message
ups.com...
And there were no suv's and powerplants and factories before the
last
ice age...

Now if only you could stop volcanos from erupting....

Now thats like saying that one should stop swallowing because salive
'may' cause cancer. g

In article , Roger Long
wrote:

No, but the rational for limiting greenhouse gasses in what history
now shows us to be a very chaotic and unstable atmosphere subject to
sudden dramatic changes is similar to not smoking in a room full of
open gas cans. Your cigarette may not set them off and they may go
off by themselves but, why risk it?

I labelled this post "somewhat OT" because as the oceans
become toxic gunk our sailing becomes less & less enjoyable.
And increased hurricanes make our insurance premiums go up.

No, but the rational for limiting greenhouse gasses in what history
now shows us to be a very chaotic and unstable atmosphere subject to
sudden dramatic changes is similar to not smoking in a room full of
open gas cans. Your cigarette may not set them off and they may go
off by themselves but, why risk it?


Rich Hampel wrote:
Now thats like saying that one should stop swallowing because salive
'may' cause cancer. g

Umm, no.

It's like saying you shouldn't make bad situation worse.

Dave's statement about "costs" is just plain stupid... can
you breathe & drink money?

I will never understand how the attitude that we should go
ahead and screw up the environment just because there's
still some left became "conservative."

Regards
Doug King

I will never understand how the attitude that we should go ahead and
screw up the environment just because there's still some left became
"conservative."

Yes, wouldn't it be nice (and an utter surprise in today's political
climate) if the "conservatives" actually wanted to conserve something?

--

Roger Long

ummmmmm Dave, if you look back in history you will find that most of
the conservation was accomplished by 'conservatives'. You can start
with Gifford Pinchot, Teddy Rooseveldt, etc. and work your way up to
the present day. On the other hand the 'liberal' method is to simply
cry about everything (perceived) ... and then ultimately do nothing.
big g

In article , Roger Long
wrote:


I will never understand how the attitude that we should go ahead and
screw up the environment just because there's still some left became
"conservative."

Yes, wouldn't it be nice (and an utter surprise in today's political
climate) if the "conservatives" actually wanted to conserve something?

On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 23:37:09 GMT, Rich Hampel
wrote:

ummmmmm Dave, if you look back in history you will find that most of
the conservation was accomplished by 'conservatives'. You can start
with Gifford Pinchot, Teddy Rooseveldt, etc. and work your way up to
the present day. On the other hand the 'liberal' method is to simply
cry about everything (perceived) ... and then ultimately do nothing.
big g

That's fine, but I haven't seen an American conservative since
Eisenhower, or a Canadian one since...well, I've never seen a Canadian
one.

A true conservative doesn't give a damn about religion or issues
stemming from that morass, rightly deeming it the private concern of
the individual.

Lest this go all political, I will say that the sailing temperament is
conservative in parts and anarchic in others. Which sounds
libertarian, but they never want to help bail, so screw 'em.

R.