On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Edward Cherlin <echer...@gmail.com> wrote:
<< snip >> > > Let's hear it then from the rest of you. What are your issues with > Global Warming science vs. the carbon fuel industry and their > scientific and political shills and common or garden variety dupes? > Hey there Ed, nice chatting, see you on on edu-sig (Python.org) sometimes too. Our little think tank, isepp.org, meeting @ Linus Pauling's boyhood home in Portland, Oregon, have talked over GW and/or GCC extensively, including in our Yahoo! archives. This is the heart of the Silicon Forest and we pride ourselves on being engineers, good ones. The decision tree is clear and you spell it out: is there a warming trend (yes or no) and if yes, are humans responsible to some degree? I think you and I would say "yes" and "yes". But then there's a pause point we need to insert: is humanity having responsibility for climate change a bad thing? If we have long term plans to terraform Mars (some say we do), then we need to get our sea legs with this Gaia Hypothesis (appears to be correct) and start realizing that GCC is somewhat under the conscious control of humans. Will they be able to self-organize successfully? Somehow that's always the question, in every age. Remember that vast climate cycling is characteristic of this planet so that even without human influence, we were expecting another Ice Age soon. If humans have found a way to play with thermostat, that could come in handy. On the other hand, giant geodesic domes inside of which we have climate control, outside of which we have much less (because we don't control solar cycling), may be the evolutionary trend, not claiming to be all-knowing. Such pockets of climate control (inside domes) is already a feature in UK architecture (Cornwall) as you probably know. We study this place in Martian Math (my WikiEducator topic). In sum, I don't see "no change" as in any way normal for climate. It's all about cycling and changing. That humans are now butting in at a level that really changes the ocean water levels is a somewhat new development and we're gaining the consciousness to go with it, which is what one would expect. The design is intelligent i.e. self aware and adapting, one might say that without thumping a Bible. I am entirely unaware of what has so far been uploaded to Wikieducator in the way of Gaia Hypothesis literature. Lynn Margulis is a good source of information on early Earthian biotica, the different gaseous makeups one may take as evidence of biomass activity. These gas disequilibria are what spectrometers look for in seeking the chemistry of life on other planets. Kirby -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WikiEducator" group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to wikieducator@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wikieducator-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
