NavList:

   

Reply

I'll try to stop after this.

CO2-induced global warming has one thing going for it, --unlike other
air pollution myths, such as the deleterious effects of acid rain on
trees or even ponds-- it is based upon a well understood physical
phenomenon, the greenhouse effect.  How this relates to the global
energy budget (and thus temperatures) is another question entirely,
although the simulations are fairly straight-forward (no new science
principles needed), if incredibly complex.

The hockey stick graph has just been accepted by an National Academy
of Science panel.  The general consensus among scientists appears to
be that human-caused warming is occurring.  Please note that I said
the consensus SEEMS.  I've seen blatant lies in scientific journals
about consensus.

What I don't believe about global warming are the forecasts and the
dire warnings being issued.  I expect we'll be able to adapt to
changes in global temperatures.

It appears that solar energy, which could fuel a hydrogen economy, is
coming closer.  Less than 10^7 acres could supply the U.S.' current
energy needs.  This is not a huge area.  There are additional
sources, such as wind and nuclear.

Fred


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to NavList@fer3.com
To , send email to NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply