I saw that article and didn't post it, as I thought it was indefensibly stupid.
A On 11 Nov 2014 19:52, "Motoko" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello list, > > the libertarian CATO institute is against geoengineering. (11.11.2014) > http://www.cato.org/blog/geo-engineering-climate-geo-bad-idea > > The reason is, that climate change is no problem at all. "Thankfully, most > signs point to only a modest > <http://www.cato.org/blog/you-ought-have-look-ipcc-deception-poor-performing-climate-models-natural-disasters> > global temperature increase resulting from our fossil fuel usage—a rise > that will be readily adapted to and which actually may work out to be more > beneficial > <http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/obamas-social-cost-carbon-odds-science> > than detrimental." > > The author suggests that instead of going for GE you "just say 'No, thank > you, I’d much rather take my chances with the climate that comes than risk > the alternative.'" > > Regards > Nils > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
