John,

This is a fallacious argument based on a fallacious premise.

OK, let me throw that premise back at you.

What is the worst case scenario if we don't do anything about our sun going 
supernova?
What is the worst case scenario if we do something to try to prevent it going 
supernova?


After all, there is a more solid evidence that our sun will go supernova than 
there is of AGW. 

I trust you see my point.  If not, I'll be more than happy and willing to spell 
it out for you.


Jojo




  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: John Berry 
  To: [email protected] 
  Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 4:28 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Data "Worrying" 2000 climatologists about Global 
Warming ....


  What is the worst case scenario if there is a problem and we don't do 
anything about it?
  What is the worst case scenario if there isn't and we do something about it?


  On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Jojo Jaro <[email protected]> wrote:

    Randy,

    It seems to me that before we institute measures to correct a "problem", we 
must first make "sure" there is a problem.  Taking steps to correct a 
non-existent problem is irresponsible considering that such steps would cause a 
whole new set of problems.  We should not take DRACONIAN measures to correct a 
"possibility".  This is pure speculation and wholly irresponsible.  Settle the 
science first and do not cram it down people's throats.

    I'm all for clean energy and I am gradually weaning my farm from raghead 
oil by converting more and more of my needs to solar, wind and biogas.  That is 
also why I'm big into cold fusion and doing my own research into it.  However, 
such measures should not be forced down people's throats by some global agenda. 
 They should be adopted as market forces make them viable and financial 
tenable.  As you will find, when you give people a choice, people will adopt 
the more sensible solution.  I just despise big, overreaching, 
communistic/socialist and fascist world governments telling you what to do to 
promote their "Environmental Worshipping" agenda. 

    That is my stand on it, and it has nothing to do with being conservative or 
not, it's just common sense.


    Jojo



      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Randy wuller 
      To: [email protected] 
      Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 3:54 AM
      Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Data "Worrying" 2000 climatologists about Global 
Warming ....


      Jojo:

      I don't understand your passionate position on this issue.  Given some 
evidence either way, the only logical position is one of caution.  If there is 
a possibility mankind can change the climate on this planet, it seems to me we 
should take some care to avoid that alternative unless there is no doubt about 
what our meddling will change and it is harmless.
      It is the conservative thing to do, yet, it seems most conservatives feel 
differently.  It is a puzzle to me.

      Ransom
        ----- Original Message ----- 
        From: Jojo Jaro 
        To: Vortex-l 
        Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 1:22 PM
        Subject: [Vo]:New Data "Worrying" 2000 climatologists about Global 
Warming ....


        Here's some new data that is "worrying" 2000 climatologists about 
Global Warming ....

        Obviously, since 2000 of them were right, this new data must be wrong.

        This first link shows the rate of ice melting leading to the conclusion 
that Global Warming must be accelerating....???

        
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/28/sea_levels_new_science_climate_change/


        Then, to confirm it, this 2nd link "definitely" shows that Global 
warming is occuring that is "correlated" to the amount of C02 that man pumps 
out into the atmosphere.... ????


        
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/29/wmo_global_temp_figures_2012_doha_ninth_hottest/


        But, what do I know.  I'm not one of those 2000 climatologists who 
where NOT bribed or threatened in any way.  And since, there's 2000 of them; 
there's only one of me.  They must be right and I am wrong and anybody 
questioning their conclusions must be nuts.  Right Jed?


        Hey, if others can violate forum list rules with impunity regarding AGW 
propaganda, I should be able to do the opposite propaganda with impunity... 
right?




        Jojo


        PS:  BTW, I want nothing more than people laying off AGW (or Anti-AGW) 
propaganda from this forum.



        No virus found in this message.
        Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2637/5466 - Release Date: 
12/17/12


Reply via email to