[irish_links]

... and all the chemicals that are combinations of those elements, have been here on this earth for billions of years. Nature continually moves them, breaks them down, and recombines them over and over again through the eons....

I agree with the spirit of your post, Katana, but it contains a key logical fallacy. Although the carbon being emitted into the atmosphere has existed on earth for billions of years, it was not in recent eons in the gaseous form of carbon dioxide. Changing the character of the element may have very significant effects, possibly adverse to human and environmental health.

But that is just a quibble. The unassailable fact is that the cost of reducing the temporary increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is many times higher than the cost of suffering the mild climate changes that may be occuring because of it.

We should be exploring alternatives to fossil fuels. We will need an alternative when fossil fuels become relatively scare in 50 years or so. In the mean time, we need to stop spending so much research time and money supporting bogus climate change theories and get on to the real business of perfecting fossil fuel alternatives.

Regards, Irish_links

[Risa]

>>to stop spending so much research time and money supporting bogus climate change theories and get on to the real business of perfecting fossil fuel alternatives. <<

A very good point, and I agree. Yet some people seem not to want to face the fossil fuel limitation. Some say limited fossil fuel resources are a bogus claim, too.

risa