To: CedarDave
PING for good news!! I fail to understand why it is "good" news to find that we have no influence over a changing climate. It seems to me that "good" news would be that we've found a way to dampen the global climate changes.
19 posted on
01/30/2007 7:42:06 AM PST by
Gondring
(I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
To: Gondring
Anytime rational thought and truth win over agenda driven hysteria it's good news.
To: Gondring
I fail to understand why it is "good" news to find that we have no influence over a changing climate. It seems to me that "good" news would be that we've found a way to dampen the global climate changes.Huh? It's good news because it isn't our (capitalists') fault and implimenting the Wealth Redistribution Protocol (Kyoto) will have no climatological effect. Bush has been right all along and Algore is still a raving lunatic.
It's also good news because unless we continue to adapt to our constantly changing climate, we're extinct. Looks like we'll just have to adapt.
29 posted on
01/30/2007 7:51:19 AM PST by
cake_crumb
(When "bipartisan study groups" prosecute wars, you get Another Viet Nam)
To: Gondring
It seems to me that "good" news would be that we've found a way to dampen the global climate changes. If we had found a way to dampen the changes thousands of years ago, much of the US would still be under ice.
Aren't you glad we have Niagara Falls and the Great Lakes?
30 posted on
01/30/2007 7:52:04 AM PST by
syriacus
(30 months in Korea => 30,000 US deaths. Average = 1,000 deaths per month under Truman.)
To: Gondring
We don't have a "control panel" powerful enough to dampen global climate changes!!
It is what it is and mother nature is gonna get her way.
34 posted on
01/30/2007 7:56:25 AM PST by
biff
To: Gondring
There are too many feedback mechanisms involved to even consider "dampening", or, if we slip into a mini ice age, to increase global warming. We are adaptable. Our species has survived this cycle before. Today, we also have technology to insulate us even further from these cyclic changes.
These books are good news because they provide credible voices to counter the hysteria. After a while, it is going to be difficult for even the mind-numbed to keep shouting down dissenters as "shills". In fact, IMO, it is great news especially if the Progressives attack everyone who disagrees with them. This will just serve to prove their fascistic agendas to the people who so far have no real opinion. Eventually, the anthropogenic, anti-US, anti-production crowd will obviously be only the 19-25% of the hard left and hopefully, we will begin to see them caricatured as such on SNL, et al.
39 posted on
01/30/2007 7:58:27 AM PST by
reformedliberal
("Eliminate the mullahs and Islam shall disappear in fifty years." Ayatollah Khomeini)
To: Gondring
Ambition should be made of sterner stuff; that sort of thing.
48 posted on
01/30/2007 8:21:07 AM PST by
Old Professer
(The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
To: Gondring
I fail to understand why it is "good" news to find that we have no influence over a changing climate. It seems to me that "good" news would be that we've found a way to dampen the global climate changes. Only if one assumes that the climate change is a bad thing. Global warming may well have a beneficial effect.
To: Gondring
I fail to understand why it is "good" news to find that we have no influence over a changing climate. Don't worry, or worry, depending on your bent: Singer and Avery are wrong. I expect that Svensmark and Calder will have about the same impact.
To: Gondring
"It seems to me that "good" news would be that we've found a way to dampen the global climate changes."
Your comment seems to suggest that the climate of - say - 80 years ago was the "baseline" or "normal" or "ideal" global climate, and that any deviation from that, one way or the other, is bad. Is that what you believe and - if so - is there any scientific basis for that belief?
To: Gondring
I fail to understand why it is "good" news to find that we have no influence over a changing climate. For one thing, it puts the lie to the bogus charge that we should destroy our standard of living in a vain attempt to change nature.
For another, I am very much pleased that mankind cannot influence the climate. Can you possibly imagine the mess we'd have if governments could institute policies that changed our climate? Look how they screw up things when they try to regulate economies. They would destroy the earth with the same efficiency.
138 posted on
01/30/2007 5:42:08 PM PST by
ChildOfThe60s
(If you can remember the 60s......you weren't really there)
To: Gondring
I fail to understand why a few degree rise in temps along with some extra rain and a little extra CO2, all of which would increase crop production and tree growth is a bad thing.
It is 6 degrees w/ snow showers right now in Indianapolis and is going to be colder this weekend. If given my druthers I would rather it be sunny and 40.
To: Gondring
It seems to me that "good" news would be that we've found a way to dampen the global climate changes. What is wrong with the global climate changes? What is wrong with seasons of the year?
186 posted on
01/31/2007 7:36:53 PM PST by
A. Pole
(Gore:We are the most powerful force of nature.We are changing the relationship between Earth and Sun)
To: Gondring
"I fail to understand why it is "good" news to find that we have no influence over a changing climate." Because humility may very well be the most important and least common of human virtues, and because it's a reminder that the universe is unfolding as it should.
226 posted on
02/06/2007 8:26:49 AM PST by
Joe 6-pack
(Voted Free Republic's Most Eligible Bachelor: 2006. Love them Diebold machines.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson