On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Gruff Goat <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Oh heck. I'll jump in: > Gawd, I _hate_ it when I agree with Gruss. However I think he's totally on point here. The problem I see with Robert's argument is that he seems to be arguing from the position of the planet vs. the position of the humans on the planet. It's true that earth has had dramatic swings, cooling trends, warming trends, ice ages etc over the tens of billions of years it's been around. I haven't heard anyone refute that. The point you seem to be missing is the impact that it's going to have on _our_ species. Big deal that 55 billion years ago there was 4-5x more CO2. How is that even relevant? The earth will survive no matter what we do or how much CO2 there is. We however will not. In the grand scheme of things we may have very little impact on the overall trend of climate, but if we can have _some_ impact to decrease the speed at which mother earth tires of us then we must explore it. You are talking about a scope of _billions_ of years. If we can increase our longevity by thousands, tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of years it's worth it, is it not? Robert, you kind of remind me of a big tobacco guy back in the 50's. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:300062 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
