As I've often suggested, the cycles have come before, and will come again,
and we humans can adapt or die. :)
Speaking of which, I've a fresh batch of magic brew steeping now, Arch.
Shall I save you a cup? Best swallowed while warm, and quickly, with a
dollop of honey after.

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 9:06 AM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> The Eocene ran from 56 million to 34 million years ago, much longer
> than humans have existed unless science is just a Bishop Usher
> memeory. Geological evidence from the early and middle part of this
> period offers troubling news: the average temperature in the tropics
> at this time could have been as high as 40°C while the poles were at
> temperatures of 15 or 20°C. None of our climate models accounts for
> how this "Eocene hothouse" might have arisen (New Scientist, 21 June
> 2008, p 34).  This is bad news for life on Earth. For a start, any
> tweaks we make to our climate models to account for it will produce
> scarier predictions of warming. Secondly, it suggests that there is no
> feedback mechanism that will stabilise a warming world against runaway
> climate change. And third, there is geological evidence for plant
> extinctions in the Eocene.  If the modern Earth goes the same way and
> plants in the tropics start dying, that will provide yet another way
> for atmospheric carbon dioxide levels to rise faster. The Eocene
> hothouse anomaly suggests that our worst-case scenario is probably
> optimistic to say the least.  Human contributions have been puny in
> comparison.  The only place safe to sun-bathe may well be Santa's back
> garden and the elves have already staked out the sun beds as surely as
> early-rising Germans in Majorca.  This makes me wonder whether the
> secret primaries are politicians go through involve such matters as
> pissing in the wind contests.
>
> I'm agnostic in the sense I can't disprove the existence of some kind
> of god (to be honest I think 'something' we don't construe well is
> likely and is likely to have nothing to do with our fables around the
> world).  Information such as the above and a lot of basic science we
> are all part of is at bottom what I believe in.  The elves, of course,
> only appear when Chris and I share his magic brew whilst teasing
> Flying Harringtons on the days we devote to world domination in our
> off-shore bunker created by skimming Craig's massive profits as owner
> of this group (some believe Craig is only a fictitious Patsy we have
> set up in case the IRS rumble us).  In light of the above, there are
> real questions about Dawkins telling us god probably doesn't exist and
> we should just get on with life.  What signs do we show of a form of
> lie that takes the real information above seriously?
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" 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/minds-eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to