On Jun 22, 5:32*am, Harryk wrote:
On 6/21/11 8:40 PM, wrote:









On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 20:28:12 -0400, Wayne B
*wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:36:20 -0700, wrote:

Yeah, many of the conditions now are the same as the conditions then..
*TRY READING* Man wasn't around 500 million years ago creating the
conditions causing the mass extinctions. I'll bet the sun was.

Jeez, no wonder no one will talk to you.

Stick with name-calling.

So, if I say that there's a condition called high blood pressure, then
there can be one and only one cause for that condition? Try looking up
the word condition:

Truth is that no one really knows for sure what caused mass
instinctions or ice ages in the past. *There has been a lot of
research and informed speculation but nothing that I'd describe as
conclusive. * The one thing we know for sure is that past actions of
mankind had nothing to do with it. * The other thing we know for sure
is that large numbers of people in and out of academia are competing
for research funding and they are not above releasing a dramatic press
release every now and then. *Anyone who takes all of these dire
pronouncements as gospel needs to get a life.

Actually, you're almost right. It's not possible to know with absolute
certainty what caused extinctions. There are some good theories (that
would be scientific theories, which include forming and testing
hypothesis).

You can not make a serious claim that the small dollars being spent on
climate research in any way influences the overwhelming data on how
mankind has affected the environment, esp. when compared to the
enormous amount of money big oil and heavy industries are spending to
try and debunk or undercut the science with their own dramatic press
nonsense and commercials.

The vast consensus is that mankind has been negatively influencing the
environment since the Industrial Revolution began, and it's generally
getting worse not better. Something needs to be done, and we need to
start now.

Science is not about taking pronouncements as "gospel." In fact,
skepticism is the basis for the scientific method. Those not well
educated believe that because there is some overblown and ginned up
controversy that means the whole notion of adverse, mankind created
climate change is in doubt. It isn't. Those not well educated look at
a cold winter or a violent storm or whatever and proclaim that there
is no such thing as global warming or that it's a fact. It's much more
nuance than that.

Anything w'hine posts on this subject matter is colored by the fact that
he is a corporate apologist and an investor in oil companies.
Obfuscation is part of his apologist's game.

Your jealousy of Wayne is showing, Herr Krause. He enjoys life,whilst
you stay miserable. You really should do something about that before
you turn green like a frog. This is, unless you like it that way. And
come to think of it, I'm sure you do.