On Tuesday 21 January 2003 02:53, Roger Oberholtzer wrote: > On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 12:12:16 -0800 (PST) > > Net Llama! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- Tim Wunder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Moving to general (at least trying to...) > > > > > > The greenhouse effect is no more than a theory. A popular one, but > > > > thanks dubya. > > > > on the contrary its been proven, and the US is one of the few countries > > that doesn't officially recognize it. > > The US recognizes that the climactic changes being associated with the > current thing called greenhouse have occurred. What they do not agree with > (me too) is that they are the direct result of human activity, nor that > imposing quotas on producer countries (even adjustable with a possibility > to sell off ones unused quota) is a solution. Producers are penalized, not > consumers. You may argue: set the producers straight and the consumers will > be sorted out as well. What effect on the already fragile world opinion > would it be for the US to use up its quota for products only available in > the US? After all, that market would come first (it has the most to spend).
>>>What you mean is that George Bush Jr. and the variious energy and pollution industries who bought the White House for don't recognize the human component of the greenhouse and that is some type of annual of cycle. I'm a biologist, but I have to admit that I knoe of no mechanism that take C)2 generated by the human species and sends it directly into the ground to form coal deposits. The only mechanism I know that keeps the eath's surface temperature below the point where the oceans would boil away is the conversion of co2 to oxygen by green plants. And here's the double wammie of the human race at the time when we're dumping more co2 into the atmosphere since life began we're wipimg out the phytoplankton of the oceans, the trees of the forest and destroying grassland areas that are the main co2 scrubbers on the earth. As far as cycles go consider that last year there was clear open water at the North Pole. The last time that happened was just be for the big space rock fell on the dinosaurs 60 million years ago. > > What is needed is not some half-baked 'plan' to curb emissions that is not > enforceable and that has major drawbacks out of the box. > > >>>There is nothing unenforceable about emission controls. All it takes is that when some senator or congress calls an antipollotion agency to express his concern about the effect that an agency action will have on the poor workers in his district is to just hangup on him, log in his call and hand the thing over to the press. Cockroaches and politicians who have pimped their office to special interests don't operate well in the light. Who knows. Maybe humans are part of some greater plan that is actually > meant to release all those trapped fluorocarbons that have been layed down > over the eons. The short term effects are change. But in the long run, who > knows? Who are we to mess with possible plans bigger than any of us? _______________________________________________ General mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/general
