On 7/3/2012 2:23 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
On 7/2/2012 6:44 PM, Doug Miller wrote:
Dave wrote in
news:04c1v7p05eacj329fc3af82m3r2b4n6gkk@
4ax.com:

On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 13:05:30 -0400, wrote:
I can't disprove global warming, but we're currently on the high side
of a sunspot cycle which fits with 100 degrees in the afternoon and 75
degrees at night. Wouldn't true global warming also increase the
nighttime temperatures?
This is ridiculous. It's a factual impossibility that man has not had
a noticeable affect on the weather of this planet. ALL that you
naysayers have to offer in rebuttal is half baked theories as to why
it probably is something else.
The earth receives more energy from the sun in *one hour* than human
beings consume in
an *entire year*. That's about five orders of magnitude.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy
And yet some people continue to insist that man has more influence on
the climate than the
sun has.


Global warming theorists (NOT me) claim that carbon dioxide acts as an
energy trap that lowers the amount of solar energy that re-radiates back
into space, that it's this increased retention of solar energy that is
killing all the polar bears.
Personally, I think that even if the globe was warming ( and I don't
think it is, at least not significantly, and if it is, it's not caused
by man), on a global scale it would probably be a good thing. More
energy inevitably would result in increased plant growth, which would
feed more animals as well. On a global scale it would be worth it to
push beachfront property farther inland in return for a global
environment that's more hospitable to life in general.


Yes no one has proven that warming is a bad thing. But we have had
abundant proof that the suggestion of global warming is a gold mine of
opportunity to sell the next save the world idea.

Let us sell you "something" so that your share of the foot print,
(.0000000000000000000000000000000001%), will decrease by the same
amount. Much to do about nothing.