>>> So let me ask, is there anyone on this list who doesn't believe mankind is
>>> capable of impacting global climate?
>>Still misses it, since it overlooks the following scenario:
>>"... mankind is capable of impacting global climate AND with 100%
> probability overcoming a possible naturally occurring opposite trend?"
>
> Separate questions.
> 1. Is mankind *capable* of doing enough stuff to impact climate?
> 2. Given current climate trends (climate is always changing one way or
> another), is what mankind is *currently* doing going with or against that
> trend?
> I posit that the answer to 1 is: "yes, obviously". If we set off on a global
> campaign to burn every piece of combustible matter on the planet as quickly
> as possible I am certain we would introduce enough matter into the atmosphere
> to cause a change in climate. We are more than *capable* of impacting
> climate, whatever views are of whether we *are* and whether it matters (or is
> good or bad).
That seems true; and easy to prove scientifically. Of course, this
human-induced change will be adding to or subtracting from whatever
naturally occurring trend.
> The answer to 2 may be the kicker. It is entirely possible that we *should*
> be doing everything we can to warm the planet because natural trends are in
> the opposite direction. It is also possible that the trend is towards a
> warmer environment, in which case we would now be accelerating that change,
> which would be bad.
Yup, my point exactly - that is the question that needs to be answered
and nobody seems to be bothered with it. People only debate #1, but
not really touch #2.
> I have seen reports that the sun seems to be entering a cooler period, so
> maybe we will find that all our carbon emissions have been a good thing and
> that efforts to slow them down will be bad. But we can't forecast solar
> trends worth a hill of beans yet, so really we just don't know.
Indeed, figuring this out IMHO needs to happen before any debate, but
debate rages on while this question is not being answered.
And, finally, I simply loved, loved this one:
>There might be one good thing about the global warming controversy, however.
>There are a lot of people who need to feel that they
>are doing something important, and if they aren't given some relatively
>harmless cause to advocate for and against, they might just
>be liable to do REAL damage.
Totally on target!
P.S. I have not idea how come this is boiling on both [debate] and
[funsec] at the same time :-)
--
Anton Chuvakin, Ph.D
http://www.chuvakin.org
http://chuvakin.blogspot.com
http://www.info-secure.org
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
