you guys even bother to read my link? one time Greenland was GREEN and the historical and scientific evidence is there. the last major ice age was about forty thousand years ago, How come it warmed up? Cave Men in SUVs and using too much toilet paper?

And your point Dennis?

Lol, All the details arent the point. The temperature has gone up and it's gone down throughout the history of the world. And that was before evil corporations with their windfall profits gave so many of us the opportunity for the lifestyle some seem so intent on destroying.

As Steve said, major climate change has occurred and people had virtually no impact on it but were impacted by it

Well I'm glad we finally settled whether or not the climate is warming up. Even if it's just a tacit agreement on that point.


Who said anything about corporations being evil?

Randy

 Quote: Connie Sutherland

I look at it that whatever the amount or percent of damage to the earth we humans do, we can back off without destroying our economy. I would love to see slowing of pollution and even repairing of environmental damage contributing to our economy as bright young engineers and scientists and entrepreneurs bring their newly-minted educations to bear on the issue.

I'm all for progress. Look at how much cleaner we are compared to the 60's. But having politicians punish me for just living is more then I can stand. Let those bright young entrepreneurs bring out something better and they'll get rich and we'll all benefit without forcing me into poverty.

Few people I know are in a position to argue with credibility against actual climate scientists, and from what I read, very few of them are in disagreement. They have data and training and an understanding of the science better than I do. I also don't try to perform my own lasik surgery or make my own shoes. I leave that to folks who know how.

All that said, what harm is done to assume that human-influenced climate change is correct? To behave as if it were gives us a cleaner planet, more natural habitats, and a more sustainable approach to resource consumption. What's the downside? Even if all the climate scientists are wrong, aren't these things we should be doing anyway?

What harm?

Kyoto Protocol?

 Quote: Alyssa Myracle

UC Berkley. *snicker*
I enjoy reading all the different points of view- especially when it is admitted that there ARE different points of view.

It's mostly science. He does have a point of view, and he expresses it, but the book is mostly about explaining the science so policy makers have something more than ideology to base their decisions on.

Here's an example. Let's suppose Alyssa has been promoted to anti-terrorism Czar and has to decide how to use limited funds to protect the U.S. from a terrorist threat. Should she expend vast sums of money and human resources to protect us from a suit case sized nuclear weapon detonated in Central Park? If she reads the book she'll understand the science well enough to put the threat in its proper perspective. How she deals with it is up to her, but she will be dealing with it fully understanding what such a bomb could do, and what it couldn't do.

Here's another example. Suppose Alyssa has to make policy decisions about storing nuclear waste. Would it make a difference to her if she understood that the radioactivity in the state of Colorado is 20 times greater than the legal limit allowed for Yucca Mountain? (Turns out there is a lot of uranium in Colorado.) Knowing this doesn't tell her what the right answer is, but it allows her to make her decisions on the basis of science, rather than on the basis of what is printed in the popular press.

 Quote: randy allen

Well I'm glad we finally settled whether or not the climate is warming up. Even if it's just a tacit agreement on that point.


Who said anything about corporations being evil?

Randy

Lol, not quite.