The truth at last

"rb608" wrote in news:1173806008.383231.53870
@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com:

Having been away from this nuthouse for a day or so, I've been
entertained by some of the utter idiocy in this thread. Leaving the
extremes aside, though, I'm a tad curious about your question. At
this stage of the research, inasmuch as the scientific community has
only recently accepted the GW premise as a certainty, I'm kinda
doubtful that the firm estimate you seek is even possible at this
time.

Based on what little I recall from my readings, I believe the general
scientific opinion is that the human race has it in its power to
significantly reduce or halt GW.

I was right with you until now. If we don't have an estimate of the human
contribution to global warming, how do we know if its in our power to
reduce or halt it through conservation efforts? I'm still trying to catch
up with the '70s projections of an ice-age, and the giaia (sp?) flower-
world model that said increased temperature lead to increased cloud cover
lead to decreased temperature.

Again, I don't doubt global warming, but I'd really like to see the firm
numbers before I sign on to the cause du jour. When people say we can
change things, I'd like to know how much.



--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

On Mar 13, 10:33 am, Scott Seidman
wrote:
Again, I don't doubt global warming, but I'd really like to see the firm
numbers before I sign on to the cause du jour. When people say we can
change things, I'd like to know how much.

Heretic!

:-),
- Ken

" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Mar 13, 10:33 am, Scott Seidman
wrote:
Again, I don't doubt global warming, but I'd really like to see the firm
numbers before I sign on to the cause du jour. When people say we can
change things, I'd like to know how much.

Heretic!

Moron.

Wolfgang

Again, I don't doubt global warming, but I'd really like to see the firm
numbers before I sign on to the cause du jour. When people say we can
change things, I'd like to know how much.

Needless to say, the single light bulb thing was metaphorical.

As for the actual contribution, I'll try making my point a different
way (or two). I'm satisfied with a less quantifiable answer. I
believe it helps, or I don't. If I believe it helps, I'll do it. I
don't really need to know how much. OTOH, I do understand where
you're coming from. I'm not willing to have my family shiver in a
cold house or sit in the dark for a .005% difference. Still, if I can
make modest lifestyle changes in the mean time, I'm fine with that.

Although I previously resisted bad analogies, I'd offer that of
driving your family in a speeding car. You know that if you slow
down, you're chances of living longer increase. How soon do you take
your foot off the gas? Do you wait for NHTSA data to tell you that
57.185 mph is the optimal speed?

Joe F.

rb608 typed:
snip
Although I previously resisted bad analogies, I'd offer that of
driving your family in a speeding car. You know that if you slow
down, you're chances of living longer increase. How soon do you take
your foot off the gas? Do you wait for NHTSA data to tell you that
57.185 mph is the optimal speed?

Hmmmm . . . What family members? Do I like them? Am I dying of terminal
cancer anyway? How much fuel is in the tank? Does the NHTSA consist of
mostly Democrats or Rebublicans?

For an engineer, you sure don't consider the variables! ;-)
--
TL,
Tim
-------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

rb608 wrote:

I'm not willing to have my family shiver in a
cold house or sit in the dark for a .005% difference.

but 300 million (or 3 billion) making a .005 (percent?) difference equals??

jeff (in awe of engineers, math, and the atmosphere...but it has been
uncommonly warm in nc recently based on my 56 years of anecdotal experience)

"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
. 1.4...
"rb608" wrote in news:1173806008.383231.53870
@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com:

Based on what little I recall from my readings, I believe the general
scientific opinion is that the human race has it in its power to
significantly reduce or halt GW.

"General scientific opinion" may be too strong a term. Choices are limited;
one can proceed on the assumption that the consequences of global climate
change could be dire enough to warrant drastic and immediate action.....and
that there is still time to do something substantive about it.....or one can
sit back and do nothing. No one has yet made a convincing case for havoc
resulting from reduction of greenhouse gases and other heating factors. As
a bit of an aside (as which it must be regarded since no one talks about it
much), those other factors are more than enough, without taking greenhouse
gases into account, to expose the utter stupidity of suggestions that human
activity cannot possibly have a significant effect on global temperatures.

I was right with you until now. If we don't have an estimate of the human
contribution to global warming, how do we know if its in our power to
reduce or halt it through conservation efforts?

Do the experiment. Check the results.

I'm still trying to catch
up with the '70s projections of an ice-age, and the giaia (sp?) flower-
world model that said increased temperature lead to increased cloud cover
lead to decreased temperature.

Stupid ideas never die. Theories concerning the possibility that current
trends in global climate change might trigger a precipitous decrease in
temperatures are interesting and have not yet been demonstrated to be
untenable. They will likely be with us for a while. If any of them prove
to be correct, their proponents will be vindicated and all of us (meaning
your offspring, or theirs, of course......not my problem) can spend the next
few thousand years sitting in smoky cold caves, alternately smacking our
heads against the cold stone walls and ****ing on our ancestors graves. If
not, they will die. The idea that these theories ever gained any widespread
and firm acceptance among people who occasionally took their heads out of
their asses long enough to see what oxygen is all about, is a stupid one.
It will never die.

Again, I don't doubt global warming, but I'd really like to see the firm
numbers before I sign on to the cause du jour. When people say we can
change things, I'd like to know how much.

This isn't like exit polling in an election.......you'll be dead before the
numbers come in.

Wolfgang