On reading this news report I didn't know whether to laugh or cry for those who own beachfront property in Goa:-))
The Associated Press is breathlessly reporting that emissions of greenhouse gases increased for a seventh straight year - by a WHOPPING 1% between 2006 and 2007. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,568922,00.html In releasing the emissions data, U.S. climate treaty chief Yvo de Boer said the numbers "underscore, once again, the urgent need to seal a comprehensive, fair and effective climate change deal in Copenhagen." In the meantime, Mr. de Boer forgot to mention that the earth has experienced a slight cooling trend since 1998. UN climate change modeler, Mojib Latif, is warning his colleagues that their models are seriously out of kilter and that the cooling trend may continue for TWENTY YEARS. I call this the ultimate "inconvenient truth". But not to worry, says Mr. Latif, even though our models have been wrong for over 10 years, the warming will resume one day:-)) http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Scientists+pull+temporary+about+face+global+warming/1994959/story.html Here's the issue in a nutshell. TOTAL greenhouse gases are about 0.036% of the total earth's atmosphere. With a 1% increase this will increase to about 0.03636% of the total earth's atmosphere. Only one third of this is "man-made", i.e. 0.01212%. Whether or not this total level of a transparent gas can act as a greenhouse to trap heat is part of the debate. The other question is how much human activity will need to be shut down or changed to control the man-made portion of 0.01212% to an extent that it will make any difference to the total level of greenhouses gases. The climate change zealots are demanding that only the western countries turn their economies upside down to "curb" the growth in 0.01212% of the earth's atmosphere while the less developed countries are refusing to comply because of the negative economic impact, thus partially offsetting whatever the developed countries may achieve. The net effect on total greenhouse gases will be negligible, if any, but the worldwide economic devastation will be considerable because the less developed countries depend on the developed countries for their own economic growth. Even China depends for most of its economic growth on the US economy. In my opinion, the focus should be on coping with whatever the effects of global warming are likely to be, rather than trying to control something I think cannot be controlled to any reasonable level by curbing or changing economic activity in only some countries. Finally, there is at least one major climate scientist who actually believes that some modest global warming will be beneficial overall: http://www.newsweek.com/id/35543
