Just to summarize my previous message briefly -- Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
The secondary effect is only predictable in the sense that one can say A will cause B. It is not predictable in the sense that one can say A will happen at such and such a time, and consequently B will happen also. This is because A arises out of complexity, and is thus inherently unpredictable without certain knowledge of the future.
This statement is an incomplete description of the actual situation because "A" (in this case) arises out of both biological complexity and at the same time out of burning coal. The latter is dead simple, and easily measured. We have certain knowledge that it is occurring, and it will continue unless we stop doing it.
van Spaandonk is correct about the biological contribution to "A" - Jed
