James Annan wrote: > Even if one assumes the premise that we are "optimally adapted" to the > present climate (which I think would be difficult to rationally defend), > it does not follow that changes to the climate would result in net costs.
Interestingly (to me at least), David Archer has backed down significantly on his original assertion. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/11/avery-and-singer-unstoppable-hot-air/#comment-21686 "the present-day warmth, which is comparable to the recent past and arguably even beneficial" Even though he is only conceding the possibility, rather actually making the claim (that the warming has been beneficial), this is not the sort of comment that is often heard in climate science circles. James --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. 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/globalchange -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
