Thread
:
Beware of hams planting dis-information...
View Single Post
#
8
May 16th 05, 11:17 PM
I AmnotGeorgeBush
Posts: n/a
From:
(Dave=A0Hall)
On Fri, 13 May 2005 11:00:26 -0400,
(I
AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote:
There has been no conclusive proof that
global warming is primarily the result of man's influence over the
environment.
(Yes, there is indeed conclusive proof.)
No there isn't, for the simple reason that we do
not have enough climatic history to determine
just how and when the climate shifts normally
as a reference before we can accurately
gauge the additional effects of humans.
The history of the earth's climate is well documented back to the
begining of the earth's creation...grammar school basic earth and
science taught this. Carbon dating confirms much and plays a large part
of the techniques used to arrive at such widely accepted and mainstream
taught scientific facts.
Like I told Frank, science can tell us that, for
instance, it was once tropical in Montana, and
that Glaciers covered much of the northern
United States during different time periods.
This proves that the earth's climate has
vacillated in a fairly wide range. But what this
DOESN'T tell us is how much of the current
global warming cycle can be attributed to
natural cyclic climatic changes, and how much
of it is a direct result of man made pollution.
Sure it can, and does. The amount of many chemical releases in the
atmosphere are mand made. Many are not man made. Some are both. However,
science has methods of measuring each,,including natural occurring vs.
manmade chemicals,,,such as methane gases.
Without a point of reference, it is extremely
difficult to positively determine how much we
are changing the climate.
The point of reference is the richness/ concentration of the gas. An
example can be the amount of methane in a predetermined air sample.
Higher concentrations of the gas can be attributed to manmade releases
and emissions. It's elementary for anyone with a fair retainment value
that took college science classes.
_
Chloroflourocarbons released by the burning of fossil fuels is directly
linked to global warming.
Global warming was proved by the continual shrinkage of the polar ice
cap confirmed by 24-7 high tech monitoring of such. Villages that reside
in the frozen tundra watch their mountains of ice shrink each year.
How much of that shrinkage would still be
occurring without man made pollution?
As you referred, the climate is thought to adhere to cycles, When the
cycles suddenly deviate substantially from the norm, it's dedeucedly
decided and accepted that something is amiss. When the glaciers continue
shrinking at an alarming rate that deviates from the projected models of
which you referred predictable climatic cycles, and the amount of junk
released in the air we KNOW has increased,..it's widely accepted by even
the republicans at this point. Do you even know what your own party says
on this issue now, Dave? You appear to be aruing with -them-.
_
You take issue with those free-thinkers and it moves you toward the
goblin that you are unable to cast out and exercise of yourself.
Once again, you don't get it (Why should I be
surprised?).
You won't be, because you continue to be on the defensive of everyone
that corrects you. You find fault with all of them. It's not us, Dave,
it's you. It's apparent it is glaringly painful when you are wrong and
corrected, but dammit, man, its not personal.
You want to get rid of what you refer to as
"poorly crafted laws"? Then great! Go for it!
No,,I love the laws and the manner in whcih they are enforced. They keep
dicks like you off the freeband and allow the rest of us to play
carefree and unfettered from you being reactive (oposed to proactive)
from the confines of your own home, much as you do on the internet. It's
yourself that has messed all over yourself time and again whining about
the lack of enforcement.
You have my support. But until then, you are
bound to respect and obey the current laws as
they stand.
Regarding this law and dx, I discriminately and selectively invoke Civil
Disobedience. Because you have difficulty comprehending the definitions
of words these days, you may seek to "quantify",,,er,,,qualify it.
Sorry,,,couldn't resist.
David Hall Jr,
."Sandbagger"
N3CVJ
Reply With Quote