On Dec 18, 12:32*am, Mark & Juanita wrote:
phorbin wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:56:18 -0800, Larry Jaques wrote:

Senor Blanchard and other alarmists are probably ****ting bricks about
this now.

Not really. *If I'm wrong it'll,just balance out the time I was right
about (the lack of) those WMD in Iraq :-).

So was I... but I still figure that going with the idea of global
warming and reducing carbon footprint, consumption, etc. is the best
idea.

In an dramatic oversimplification:

If you are wrong and we do little to nothing, the consequences are
catastrophic. We lose.

* So, you think that a couple of degree increase in global average
temperature will be that catastrophic? *Despite historical evidence that it
has been warmer (Greenland being farmed, Great Britain with vineyards) and
colder (little ice age) by similar amounts? *Just what temperature do you
believe is the "ideal" average temperature for the world to be set at?

If you are right and we do everything to avert global warming, we
continue to live and have cleaner technologies in place driven by the
idea of global warming. In short, we win.

* No, we don't just continue to live and have cleaner technologies where we
win. *If this cap and tax gets passed, the majority of peoples' lifestyles
take a dramatic turn downward, the only people who prosper will the
governments with the huge tax increases and those selling carbon indulgences
(i.e. Al Gore). *Electric bills will skyrocket, gas prices will soar. *The
trillions of $ this will suck out of the economy will cause devastating
consequences for generations. *It is very likely that people on the lower
ends of the economic scale are going to die because of this -- they won't be
able to afford to heat their homes -- developing nations will be told that
they should remain in poverty and not grow and again, people will die, just
as they are with the current DDT ban.. *... and all for what? *To avert a
0.1 C change (per one of the global warmist's estimates), even being
generous and giving his estimate an order of magnitude bump to 1 C, that is
an awful lot of personal freedom and prosperity to surrender for not much,
if any, gain. *You think China and India will go along with this nonsense? *
If not, we have just surrendered the rest of our economy and wealth to
become a second-class power to them.

If you are wrong and we do what's needed to mitigate the issue and we
manage to do so, we win.

* So you are willing to surrender your future prosperity based upon some
very flawed models and cooked books? *

I am self-interested enough to believe that the benefits presented by
the latter two, roughly stated cases outweigh the liabilities of the
former.

* You aren't looking very deeply at what those liabilities of the former are
ultimately going to cost. *



Phew...wow....*taking deep breath* The end-times must be nigh as I
find myself agreeing with Mark here.