Jerry Barnes <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> "Or the magnetic poles shift which leads to super volcanoes irrupting and
> bringing with it the next ice ag"
>
> In that case, the argument over global warming and cooling becomes very
> trivial.
>
Although they may be the same thing or both happening at the same
time. I've always been baffled by the it-must-be-or-it-must-not-be
argument for x reasons:
(1.) If the Earth is absorbing an increasing about of energy ("global
warming"), we have no idea what the effect would be. It could mean
higher land-level temperatures, it could mean lower temperatures or an
ice age, could mean more frequent and larger storms ... who knows?
(2.) If the Earth is absorbing more energy, we have no idea what
secondary effects this might have: changes in ocean currents,
earthquakes, whatever. Who knows?
(3.) Since we agree that we don't know #1 or #2 why would anyone waste
time debating it?
The facts are that we know ice caps are melting amongst other things
and we don't know why. Never will. But we should take steps to
compensate for multiple risks, prioritizing them by probability even
if the uncertainty around those probabilities is large.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:338965
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
