On 1/28/08, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 28, 2008 4:21 PM, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > The only way to achieve the goals that are supposedly needed are to > > effectively remove 3rd world industrialization while also massively > > reducing 1st world emissions. Effectively you'd need to shut down most > > of the global economy to prevent the earths climate returning to > > conditions similar to what they were 1000 years ago (The Medieval > > Optimum period) which was notably warmer than today. And even then the > > problem won't go away (Hint, no AGW on Mars and Venus, both of which > > have been warming up of late). > > > > Global Warming is a reality. So is Global Cooling. Anthrogenic Global > > Warming does not have sufficient data available to decide whether it's > > a real issue. Frankly, that requires a couple decades of data we don't > > have, as well as a good baseline on average global temperature that is > > also lacking as the earth is likely still recovering from the Little > > Ice Age that occurred beginning around 1200AD and so the temperature > > data used for a baseline is known to be historically untrustworthy. > > Also nobody has been able to come up with a climate model which > > regresses properly, so Climate Modelling is essentially useless in > > predicting the future. > > > > And it doesn't help that if Kyoto was implemented fully tomorrow it > > would have a near-immeasurable effect on global temperature (less than > > 1/10th of a degree Celsius by 2100) as CO2 is accountable for a very > > small part of the Greenhouse Effect (which is almost entirely caused > > by Water Vapour). Atmospheric CO2 is responsible for only 6-8% (I've > > seen varying numbers) of the Greenhouse Effect. And Human Emissions > > are only a relatively small part of that. > > > > There are far more important environmental issues to be spending money > > on than AGW and Kyoto. Particularly reductions in emissions of actual > > pollutants, tech transfer of cleaner designs and systems to the 3rd > > world to prevent them running into many of the pollution and toxic > > waste issues that the 1st world has experienced and found solutions > > for, cleaning up contaminated sites and watersheds, especially in the > > former Soviet countries and more. > > > > Well then, since the problem is insoluable, we should just keep living > the same lifestyles we are now, developing countries should continue > their march toward our decadence, and we should all just have a great > time as we the whole planet slides towards a grey, cloud covered > overheated Venus-like sauna. > > I don't have a wealth of scientific knowledge, nor do I have all the > facts and figures (as if anyone does), but it seems to me that it > doesn't really matter whether global warming is man-made or "natural". > It's happening, and we can try to do something about it, we can try > to slow it down, or we can live in blissful denial. If we choose the > latter, we better all think of moving away from the coasts! In fact, > we may have to do that anyway. > > If efforts to stop global warming fail, we won't be worse off for it. > Maybe our last decades (or centuries or millenia or whatever) on this > planet will be a bit more enjoyable with less shit in the air and the > soil, with clean drinkable water, with beaches we can actually use. > > OTOH, if I'm lucky I've got maybe 30 years left on this planet, and > let's face it, whatever happens, we'll still be here in thirty years, > so maybe I should just ride this out and let yoiunger generations deal > with it. We've been doing that all along, and look how well that > works! > > ;-) > > cheers, > frank >
There's a heck of a lot of good for the environment that all the effort currently put into Global Warming could solve. Imagine the difference in the 3rd world if we spent that money and effort helping them build infrastructure with 1st world levels of efficiency (Which is one of the major things that drives improved emissions controls. All that pollution is wasted valuable industrial chemicals). Fighting AGW is a waste of time and effort compared to what could be done with the same resources to improve things for our kids. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
