On May 31, 3:09 pm, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Under the U.S. Constitution, adopted treaties are the law. Per the UNFCCC
> > (an adopted treaty), the U.S. is thus committed to "avoiding dangerous
> > clinate change." Griffin seems oblivious to this.
>
> Interestingly, I've seen it argued that Bush didn't want to sign Kyoto
> precisely because he knew that the US would have to stick to it, and
> couldn't get away with signing it without any intention of
> implementing it (like say Canada). I don't know how much truth there
> is to this supposition.
>
> I'd guess that Griffin wants dangerous climate change avoided, but
> presumably his personal idea of where the threshold between dangerous
> and not dangerous lies differs from Hansen's.
According to Griffin it would not be dangerous for the climate of
Earth to change to the climate of Mercury, assuming the climate of
Earth is not currently optimal. And it is obviously not optimal,
it's too muggy in North Carolina in August for instance.
Griffin said: "To assume that it is a problem is to assume that the
state of earth's climate today is the optimal climate, the best
climate that we could have or ever have had and that we need to take
steps to make sure that it doesn't change."
This guy put his foot in his mouth bigtime.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
