On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 07:12:11 -0500, J. Clarke
wrote:


What is interesting is that according to those same ice cores, instead
of peak and precipitate drop in temperature, there had been a peak
and hold this time. And that hold goes back far more than the few
hundred years that the advocates of the industrial-emission theory are
claiming. So it seems likely that _something_ has changed that has
nothing to do with human activity, or if the something is human
activity it's not industrial CO2 emissions.

Exactly!!! One thing I can tell you for sure is, that these people
will press their agenda to the point that the only solution to the
problem of global warming as they see it, is a reduction in people.

Soilant Green, here we come.


Whatever we're doing, if humans _are_ doing it we bloody well better
keep it up until we figure out the consequences of _stopping_.

That's the big problem I have with the "we must fix this
******NOW******" argument--we don't have any reason other than a bunch
of opinions to believe that we won't be jumping out of the frying pan
into the fire.

At some point, the world is going to warm, whether humans do it or
not. The natural state over tens of millions of years has been warm
enough that there were no ice caps. The only reason that humans think
that the current state is "normal" is that we've never experienced in
our few tens of thousands of years of existence anything _different_.
If we see it as a bad thing then at some point we're going to have to
interfere with natural processes in order to _stop_ it.

The big question, that nobody seems to want to address, is "is what we
are seeing the natural end of the ice ages".

These people think that just because they have a hundred years of
climate data that they have all of the answers, when in fact they have
less than a nanosecond of data for are planet and are completely
ignoring what has happened in the past and how resilient our planet
is.