Originally Posted by DaveN007
Shane, I have posted detail after detail after detail on the subject: Are man's activities affecting the climate in any signifcant way?
You respond with one liners like "Golly gee neocons sure are dumb-dumbs"
Then FTL weighs in with the idiocy that the argument is over wether the climate is changing or not.
1) When was Earth's climate stable?
2) What can we do that will stabilize the climate?
3) Does our activity signifcantly affect the climate?
answer: WE DON'T KNOW
Those who resent our way of life naturally are quick to say "it isn't worth taking a chance".
For those of us who feel that our way of life is worth something need more convincing to give it up.
You make unfounded assumptions about the motives of those who want to control the human influence on global climate changes. It is a method for distracting your, and many readers' thought processes from a logical assessment of the mechanisms involved. As long as you are unwilling to go through the mental exercise of trying to understand the role of CO2, and other emissions by our industry, a burden on the environment that is supporting a phenomenal population increase over the last century, you will be free to stand on the sidelines and scream slogans and simplistic, out of context facts and deride those like Gore who have brought this issue to forefront of national debate. Even Bush acknowledged tonight that we are being faced with a serious challenge to control global climate change.
So, either make an intellectually honest case for why the added load on the environment by human endeavors is not going to influence the rate of climate change, or spend the effort to understand the argument of those who find the data being uncovered, not only concerning the magnitude of the load being imposed by human activity, but also on how the system has managed to achieve a damping of responses to natural phenomena in the past, and for some time, to the growing burden of the human activity today and tomorrow. These mechanisms are not particularly thoroughly understood as, until now, they were an inconspicuous part of the environment that we hardly noticed, much less studied. So, our understanding of these mechanisms is rudimentary, however, there is not a single feature being identified that suggests the system is capable of continuing to damp the response to uncontrolled increases in the load of CO2 and other emissions from human acivities we have seen over the last decades and the likely growth in that burden coming as the population continues to increase. That alone is enough to suggest the issue is real. Jim