The sciences have not reached an all insurmountable plateau and I certainly do
not imply in any way shape or form that they have.

I certainly do not believe in Hollywood scenarios either and, again, I do not
imply that we should treat such "entertainment" as anything that resembles the
truth.

However, do you truly believe that humanity will have an alternate energy source
capable of powering automobiles and factories? I do not believe that we will have
micro-fusion reactors capable of powering cars and automobiles any time soon. Nor
do I believe that humans would so willingly turn to electrical- or solar-powered
vehicles en masse. Most people only care about getting from A to B in one piece
and as quickly as they can.

I applaud your faith in the scientific disciplines but in many cases the bottom
line is the dollar, Euro, crown, etc., etc. Science is just as much business as
anything else. I have seen some truly appalling things in which the dollar won
out over real science.

I also believe that if something teeters on the edge and I knock it over that the
odds are very good that I will not catch in time before it shatters or breaks. So
why place anything is such a precarious position in the first place?

There is more than enough evidence to show that the CO2 levels are increasing and
I have little doubt that CO2 and a few other molecules are capable of keeping
energy in. So why keep on pumping out CO2 at billions of tons each year if, based
on the physico-chemical properties of such molecules, we know that such molecules
will trap more and more energy?

Personally, I would prefer not to find just how much abuse this planet can take.

Regards

John Barnard

-=jd=- wrote:

On Sun 30 May 2004 08:43:30p, John Barnard wrote in message
:

Core sampling and analysis for CO2 content does show periodic and cyclic
variations in CO2 levels. However, the quantities of CO2 have increased
dramatically over the last 100-150 years.


Have the sciences reached an insurmountable plateau? When I say science, I
don't mean only the slice looking at "global warming" - I mean *all*
disciplines.

If it hasn't reached some insurmountable plateau, is there any reason to
think that we're doomed at this point? Don't we have a year or two before NYC
is buried (ala Hollywood's portrayal)? For all we know, in less than a
century we may have some economically feasible alternative to the global
dependance on fossil fuels!! I tend to have a bit more faith in all
scientific disciplines that may have an impact (small or large) on the
multitude of problems to be solved - not just "global warming".

-=jd=-
--
My Current Disposable Email:

(Remove YOUR HAT to reply directly)