The problem I have is total lack of real science and blind to politics.
If this were a real emergency - politics would vaporize. One would hope anyway.

Now for this case:

The so called Ozone Holes. Yes, I saw them in film, yes there is problems.
How did they occur - the holes ? 'why we did it natch!' sung in unison.

How about the massive spray of very high energy particles that blasted
the earth diving into each pole due to the magnetic field and their
sensitivity to each pole. Nothing was ever said. These particles traveled
space from a large super nova. It in itself was small news as it wasn't in
our solar system. The pure scientists were interested. They set up experiments
that measured some of the results. But the libs were out in force we did
it again.

Odd we haven't heard talk lately. To busy planning on flooding most of
North America like a million or more years ago...

Martin

Martin H. Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
TSRA, Life; NRA LOH & Patron Member, Golden Eagle, Patriot's Medal.
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member.
http://lufkinced.com/


Don Stauffer in Minnesota wrote:
On Oct 21, 1:56 pm, "Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote:
"Don Stauffer in Minnesota" wrote in oglegroups.com...
snip------



BTW, the original poster was right about one thing. Global warming IS
due to a star, of course (the sun). I'd hate to live on earth if
there were no SUN!
I'm not convinced the book has been closed on that issue. I'm not a
serious tree hugger, but I don't have any problems with the idea that man is
contributing to (or even causing) global warming. It would be naive to
discount the possibility.

Harold

I should have been more specific. The greenhouse effect does require
sunlight, of course. Now, the sun should be gradually getting
slightly more output, according to astrophysics, but not enough to
cause a rapid change. A greenhouse gas, such as CO2 interacts with
the radiation balance. We would have NO greenhouse effect were it not
for both sun AND co2. The INCREASE in temp we are seeing does seem to
come far more from increasing CO2 concentration, not a corresponding
increase in solar output.

The increase in CO2 content in the atmosphere tracks quite well
increased burning of fossil fuels. My professional specialty was
radiant heat transfer in the atmosphere, and I am thoroughly familiar
with the infrared spectrum of CO2.

I am not a climatologist, so I have no idea how MUCH temperature
should go up as CO2 increases, but it MUST go up SOME. I have seen no
explanation why the earth radiation balance and feedback mechanisms
should produce a type 1 or 2 servo system. Seems to me it must be a
type zero system, which means even with negative feedback SOME temp
increase should result.

I was merely being facetious. No sun, no global warming. Of course,
no life on Earth then either.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----