«

"RichA" <> wrote in message
news:Xns9B859C576F7Dnonenowherecom@216.196.97.131
> Alan Browne <> wrote in
> news: :
>
>> RichA wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Boo hoo. Outfit your home with solar panels, grow your own food and
>>> do whatever it is you need to. Otherwise, enviroKOOKs crowing about
>>> the myth of man-made global warming should be FORCED to pay with
>>> their money for any silly initiatives the Obama crew decides to
>>> undertake to "fight" the myth.
>>
>> The biggest myth makers have been the oil and auto industries
>> fighting against the immense volume of work showing AGW.
>
> Show me any other scientific theory that puts billions (trillions) of
> dollars at stake over the shaky kind of evidence used to support the
> GW theory. Meanwhile, if the situation is so "dire" how come the

How many tens of thousands of studies does it take? I've already referred
to "Attributing physical and biological impacts to anthropogenic climate
change", Nature, v453 n7193 pp353-357.

It is a metastudy of over 29,000 observational studies (mostly from the
northern hemisphere). It shows the predicted impacts of global warming on
physical (glaciers melting, spring arriving earlier, etc) and biological
(species mating earlier, migrating, etc) systems is happening faster than
was predicted and unambiguously attributes this to anthropogenic global
warming.

> global warming cabalists were all too willing to accept the Kyoto
> Accord, which exempted two of the biggest producers of C02 (China now
> no#1, and India) from ANY controls? It's all B.S., a socialist con
> game designed to realign global wealth.

The principle that since developed countries had and continue to be the
overwhelming drivers of AGW they should contribute the most to combatting it
was adopted at the Rio summit in 1992. This is not socialism, it is simple
equity. China and to a lesser extent India have enjoyed spectacular
economic growth since then, and are now larger carbon emitters than was
forseen but they still lag far behind the worst polluters like America. Why
should developed countries enjoy the fruits of their exploitation and
pollution of the planet while under-developed countries remain in poverty?
Why should developed countries be allowed to avoid responsibility for their
actions? At the end of the day that is what you conspiracy theorists are
advocating. You want to continue living as you have and stuff everybody
else. That's not going to happen.

John Navas wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 19:15:54 +1100, "DRS" <>
> wrote in <495b2a43$0$22106$>:
>
>> "RichA" <> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9B859C576F7Dnonenowherecom@216.196.97.131
>
>>> Show me any other scientific theory that puts billions (trillions) of
>>> dollars at stake over the shaky kind of evidence used to support the
>>> GW theory. Meanwhile, if the situation is so "dire" how come the
>> How many tens of thousands of studies does it take? I've already referred
>> to "Attributing physical and biological impacts to anthropogenic climate
>> change", Nature, v453 n7193 pp353-357.
>
> "Never argue with an idiot.
> He'll drag you down to his level and
> then beat you with experience."
> -Dr. Alan Zimmerman

"Arguing with strangers on the Internet is like getting into an argument
with a vagrant. Best case scenario, you win an argument with a vagrant.
Worst case, you lose an argument with a vagrant. In either case, you end
up soaked with bum urine." - Me

On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 14:24:15 -0500, Cynicor wrote:

>> "Never argue with an idiot.
>> He'll drag you down to his level and
>> then beat you with experience."
>> -Dr. Alan Zimmerman
>
> "Arguing with strangers on the Internet is like getting into an argument
> with a vagrant. Best case scenario, you win an argument with a vagrant.
> Worst case, you lose an argument with a vagrant. In either case, you end
> up soaked with bum urine." - Me

"We're all Bozos on this bus." - F.T. and me, just another peon.