Bhaskar:
You are totally correct; I could not agree more. However, p otential solutions depend on the cause. The global increase has been about 5 degrees C for the last 10,000 years or about 0.0005 per year and 0.05 degrees for the past 100 years. That gradual rise is not the current or nearterm cause or issue. There are warming and cooling cycles, several per 1000 years and we may be in a warming cycle that accounts for the current warming. W e are also in a Malenkovic h cycle. T here are a variety of possibilities to explain the warming and CO2 may be only a minor player. T he point is that it is warming and the strategy for controlling the warming needs to be worked out and prove n so it can be implemented as necessary. To conclude it is CO2 and ALL we need to do is reduce CO2 concentration is not warranted; it is sheer stupidity in the extreme. W e need a thermostat that works and only geoengineerin g can provide that. I am appalled that the CO2 freaks have been able to block the emergence of a serious geoengineering effort. -gene ----- Original Message ----- From: "M V Bhaskar" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected], [email protected], "Ken Caldeira" <[email protected]>, "Geoengineering" <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 8:05:50 AM Subject: Re: [geo] Geo-engineering and Arctic mentioned here. Eugene What difference does the cause of the problem make to solving the problem? If Global warming and ocean acidification are problems, we should find ways to solve or mitigate them. No one is trying to punish anyone for causing the problems. We are only trying to solve it. I am sure that you will agree that even if global warming is, mainly or partly, due to natural factors, anthropogenic activity is adding fuel to the fire. :) regards Bhaskar On Saturday, 22 September 2012 08:59:16 UTC+5:30, Greg Rau wrote: Eugene, What then is your opinion on anthropogenic CO2 induced ocean acidification? Thanks, Greg From: " [email protected] " < [email protected] > To: [email protected] Cc: Ken Caldeira < [email protected] >; Geoengineering < [email protected] > Sent: Fri, September 21, 2012 2:09:31 PM Subject: Re: [geo] Geo-engineering and Arctic mentioned here. Fascinating input. Scary. Good input but spoiled gratuitously. I take exception to the gratuitous comment in the second paragraph of 'human driven' cause ignoring the fact that it not scientifically proven that global warming is human driven and because it has been warming on average for 10,000 years without enough humans or CO2 around to make a difference; AND there are cycles of warming and cooling overlaying the general warming trend. One can have an opinion, FINE, but opinion does not substitute for proven science and the theory of CO2-driven global warming clearly remains to be proven using the accepted scientific process. Science is not an election and AGW remains to be proven. until it is proven it remains a not so robust hypothesis. Why is that so hard to understand? Is it debatable? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
