Thanks for giving straight answers
Paul. From the tone of your previous
post I expected less. Glad I was wrong.


In your first post to this thread you wrote, "Or
just maybe he [Reagan] was on the right track."

I'm really curious what you meant by that. Did
you mean that technically in some instances trees
produce more pollution than cars? Or did you mean
that, overall, trees are worse for the environment
than cars?


It still seems to me that, even if technically correct,
Reagan's remark was disingenuous. Would you agree
with me on that, or no?

Paul - it may seem like I'm trying to "trap" you into a corner
or be a pain or something. But I'm really not. I'm honestly trying
to understand where someone that appears to have different
views than I do is coming from.


Regarding Al Go I'll admit that some (many?) knowledgeable, intelligent,
and intellectually honest people think global warming is either non-existent
or often overblown. And I'll admit that approaches that Al Gore would like
to see to this problem might be wrong. But I still believe that Al Gore is
highly-knowledgeable about the issue and applies rational/critical thinking
when evaluating the issue. ~ Sometimes (often) on complex issues where not
all data is known or knowable people that are knowledgable, intelligent, and
intelletually honest can come to differing conclusions.

Gary