Global Warming is a lie

[MK5]

a fantasy created by politicians so they can tax us on more stuff...

today is the 6th April... my garden should be full of daffodils....

This is the view from my bedroom window...

This is out of my lounge

and this is out of my kitchen...

[Dr. Shoe]

Actually Global Warming isn't a lie, it's part of the natural fluctuations of the planet. Latest figures hint that the mean global temperature is starting to edge back down again. The fact that man is causing it is the big lie which has been put about to justify large corporations and governments to extort more money out of us in higher prices and taxes. The main reason why you have snow in your garden is because we are experiencing freak weather, the average temperatures are actually normal for this time of year.

[Guest Loveshiheels]

The veiw out my window is the same and is still snowing

[Arctic]

a fantasy created by politicians so they can tax us on more stuff...

today is the 6th April... my garden should be full of daffodils....

This is the view from my bedroom window...

This is out of my lounge

and this is out of my kitchen...

Is there a remote possibility you don't understand the complexities of the ecosystem? I got that impression when you tried to prove your point with a few pictures.

Pretty much in the same way driving from the bakery to home without wearing seatbelts and not dying in a horrible traffic accident proves that seatbelts are a scam.

[Thighboots2]

I've got snow in my garden too. I don't think global warming is a lie, BUT it is a good excuse for the governent to rake in some more money for themselves. Snow is April is not so rare as we like to think, I know it doesn't happen every year, but it isnt like it never happens. There was one year, when I was a tender 7 years old (1962/3), it snowed on boxing day and it lay around until Easter. Fruit growers are always worried at this time of year because they don't want frosts causing damage to the new buds. Even so, it is a shock to wake up to find snow on the ground. Simon.

[yozz]

The main problem is that most people have a difficult time with statistics. There are always fluctuations. Global warming doesn't mean that we won't have cold weather anymore. It will just be (a little bit) less frequent. And then, it may well be that most of the planet gets warmer but some parts will actually get colder. This would definitely be the case if the melting of the polar ice would cause the gulfstream to revert. The geological evidence is that this has happened in the past. It will get mighty cold in Europe. Have a look at the map of the east coast of North America at the same latitude..... Expectations are that this year the world average temperature will be a bit lower because of la Nina (cold current in the pacific ocean), but in a few years there will be another el Nino and things may be hot again. I know somebody who's job it is to work with the climate models, and although Al Gore may at points exagerate, on the whole he may not be very far off. And the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere seems really the work of humanity, because over the past years we have actually had relatively little volcanic activity (a major source of CO2, but also volcanoes have a cooling effect due to the dust they put in the upper atmosphere). Now, whether governments and companies abuse the situation to squeeze more money out of the public, there you can make some safe bets. In Holland we had a case where they put 25 cents extra tax (still in the old coins, hence about 11 Euro cents) on each liter of gasoline to make people drive less. Yet in the budget they put this with the (correct) assumption that people would keep driving just as much. Another hype is the hybrid car. The other day one of the consumer programs here went to investigate how much they really save and how they live up to the advertised promises. There was no measurable profit. In the advertisements they do as if the electric engine runs for free. Would be great of course, but is a bit against physics.... Y.

[Tech]

This is out of my lounge

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i272/John_and_Gail/Other%20Stuff/DSCF0737.jpg

Holy Crap, people still own Ford Cortina's ?

I guess that belongs to people who park it there and walk the rest of the way home so their own neighbours dont see it?

[hoverfly]

1. Global warming is an natural processes that has been accelerated by man.

2. At the same time the planet is trying to warm up it's trying to cool it's self down. That's why we seem to have crazy weather

3. It's been concluded that it will be cheaper to adapt to climate change than to fight it. Most likely why NASA and government offices tried to hide global warming from the general public. C02 comes form to many sources both man made and natural to control.

4. Even though we have a movement to try to fix the damage, that most likely will not happen. But look it at the bright side. It has main streamed a whole industry into the economic factor creating jobs. Renewable energy!!! Which will help stabilize energy issues around the world. Bad news is it will take a very long time, up to 100 years to be fully effective.

5. I been in a blizzard in April, and had to deliver news papers by foot when I was a kid. So what do I really say about global warming, hold on it's going to be a Wilde ride!!!! Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!

[Dr. Shoe]

1. Global warming is an natural processes that has been accelerated by man.

I'm not so sure. Us believing that we can change the climate (control the weather) is a bit like the fleas believing that they can direct the dog. Yes it is a natural process but it's arrogance of the highest order to believe that we are causing or making a major contribution to it. The human race produces around 3% of all the CO2 produced on this planet, CO2 is about 0.02% of the atmosphere so our efforts account for 0.0006% of the atmospheric volume. This is nowhere near enough to have any effect at all on the mean global temperature, in fact CO2 has a variance of about 5% - more than we actually produce, cows produce more CO2 than we do!

2. At the same time the planet is trying to warm up it's trying to cool it's self down. That's why we seem to have crazy weather

This wonderful planet of ours has some wonderful ways of dealing with climate change. The ice caps are a "cold store" of ice ready to be redistributed if need be to bring the temperature back down. Having large ice-caps is a bit like having a air-conditioning on standby. The melting ice-caps are like having it switched on. The ocean currents are there to transfer warm water to cooler climates and vise versato help keep the planet's temperatures relatively constant. This is not the first time it's experienced global warming and conversely there have been a number of ice-ages too.

3. It's been concluded that it will be cheaper to adapt to climate change than to fight it. Most likely why NASA and government offices tried to hide global warming from the general public. C02 comes form to many sources both man made and natural to control.

What adaptations? All that's going to happen is that farmers in coller climates will be able to grow crops more associated with warmer climates and farmers in the tropics may find that their land is turning into desert. However, this will be balanced by cold tundras in the north suddenly becoming lush farmland.

4. Even though we have a movement to try to fix the damage, that most likely will not happen. But look it at the bright side. It has main streamed a whole industry into the economic factor creating jobs. Renewable an energy!!! Which will help stabilize energy issues around the world. Bad news is it will take a very long time, up to 100 years to be fully effective.

It is not damage as such, only natural changes so there's nothing to fix. The renewables industry has nothing to do with global warming but more to do with a dwindling of fossil fuels.

5. I been a blizzard in April, and had to deliver news papers by foot in them when I was a kid. So what do I really say about global warming, hold on it's going to be a Wilde ride!!!! Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!

Just like the one we had here in London this morning. I don't think the ride is really going to be so wild... we may get a couple more catrionas but they would and could have happened anyway, global warming or not!

[hoverfly]

Geeee does this mean I am blowing it out of proportion? Nope I don't think so, it's really a life changing event. There is 200 to 300 years of fossils fuel left under current estimates the question is, is everbody going to share it? Nope. Renewable answers to several problems not just in the short term but in the long term as well.

[Ninanoora]

I agree with Dr. shoe there. Global warming affects us everyone on this planet. Sea water levels will rise because of the amount ice melting in pole areas. You propably seen the estimates what would happen in next 5-10 years if it keeps melting at same speed. There would be lot of problems in europe, Venice, Holland flooded with water. The temperatures of sea, controls the flow of ocean currents, so the ice melting to sea, temporarily lowers the temperature of water in sea. Its effects are spread lot wider area than you could imagine. It might happen that it could affect the flow of golf current that brings warmer air, and therefore warmth to here in northern parts of europe, united kindom, scandinavia, etc. So it could develop to more colder here and more warmer in southern hemisphere. think about new ice age. Its proven fact that we all are going to experience more stronger acts of the nature, storms getting stronger, more hurricanes, more blizzards. Bottom line if we would try to stop it now from happening. Every nation of this world, would work together, take major steps to prevent it or make effort to minimize its effects. Meaning total end for polluting of our planet, regulations of CO2 levels. It might help us a little bit, It might spare ourselves from the worst. But we wouldnt be able to prevent global warming from happening, we have now already started the event, we must now bare it. Its the cause and effect.

[jmc]

If you think about it, Planet Earth has been in a global warming phase ever since the end of the last Ice Age.

. . .and that's a good thing!

I find it ludicrous that these climate scientists expect us to believe they can extrapolate global temperatures fifty years into the future while meteorologists cannot tell us what the temperature is going to be next week.

Mankind has only had the instruments to monitor temperature for 100 years or so, and instruments from more than 20 years ago were not all that accurate.

It's more than a lie. It is a gigantic hoax.

[bilomi]

So this a lie?

Wow... Why do people always add everything to "oh they want to find a way to tax us more" ? Is it too much for to ask to sacrifice a part of your lifestyle so that the children of your children's live in an sustainable environment ? Don't you think all the people who come with contradictory stories about global warming are supporting by companies that have lot to lose by any restrictions on carbon emissions (i.e. oil industry).

2300 scientifics (the GEIC) met a few year ago in Europe, not to dispute the yeah or nay about global warming, to evaluate the how small to how large will be the changes. And you are telling me 10 or 15 studies going in the opposite directions have any values???

Aint more blind that someone who does not want to see...

[bilomi]

Just noticed Where you were from.

There are no more surprise for me in your blind position then...

[Dr. Shoe]

So this a lie?

Not exactly, global warming is a fact. The lie is that it is because of mankind that it is happening. We have had a number of ice-ages and we have had a number of warm periods, you must remember that in Roman times they were growing grapes as far north as York (UK). In the 17th century we had a mini Ice Age where the thames would freeze to a depth of almost a metre and would stay that way for weeks, if not months. This global warming phase began back then and may or may not continue, we just don't know.

Wow... Why do people always add everything to "oh they want to find a way to tax us more" ? Is it too much for to ask to sacrifice a part of your lifestyle so that the children of your children's live in an sustainable environment ? Don't you think all the people who come with contradictory stories about global warming are supporting by companies that have lot to lose by any restrictions on carbon emissions (i.e. oil industry).

Because that's what happened. Whilst I accept that it is a good idea to cut emmissions of particulates, run recycling programmes, look for renewable energy sources and elliminate pollution for the good of our immediate environment, it should be for what it is: conservation of resources.

The only effective way to encourage people to do this is by taxing the wrong stuff and by subsidising the good stuff.

Meanwhile the companies with anything to lose are investing heavily in alternatives. Oil is getting more and more expensive to get at and so they are looking for more profitable energy sources but not too cheaply... Did you know that the average house can deploy enough solar panels to take care of ALL the household needs, even in winter? The only reason we don't do this is because the panels are so expensive...

2300 scientifics (the GEIC) met a few year ago in Europe, not to dispute the yeah or nay about global warming, to evaluate the how small to how large will be the changes. And you are telling me 10 or 15 studies going in the opposite directions have any values???

I don't think anyone is disputing global warming but more and more academics are risking their carreers by saying that global warming is a good thing.

It is a myth that sea levels are going to rise by a huge margin. Most of the Ice that is melting is already floating in the sea and what happens to the water level when floating ice melts? nothing, nil, nada, zilch. A floating object displaces its own mass and not volume of water and so therefore a melting iceberg will not add to the volume of the water. Much of the land Ice will form in lakes and pools (where it originally came from) and so the total amount of ice available to contribute to sea levels is no more than about 100 cubic kilometres or so. Spread that over 100,000 square kilometres of ocean will mean a sea level rise of a meter at most. OK much of downtown Venice might be under threat but if man builds on salt-flats and ocean marshes he should expect that...

[Arctic]

I can't believe that there needs to be so much discussion about this. Apparently most people don't understand the concept of statistics. 1. We know that temperature cycles occur naturally with huge impact on life on earth. 2. Current global warming is happening now again, that is a statistical fact. 3. We don't know for sure (ie. 100%) that the current cycle global warming is accelerated by man, but based on historical evidence, the current rate of warming is off the charts. 4. The climate is a very complex ecosystem that no one understands well. 5. The current trend of temperature rise, if continued, will reduce the planet's ability to carry its 6 billion people to about 3 or 4 by mid century, leave alone the 10 billion projected for 2050. This is diet dependent, but assumes the current distribution (Westerners consuming lots of meat and dairy, which is CO2 intensive) 6. CO2 is a very potent greenhouse gas. Despite it's concentration of only a few hundred PPM, it has proven ability to regulate temperature on a planet like earth. 7. There is a strong correlation between CO2 concentration and surface temperature, and that correlation holds for as far as we can go back in time from the data we obtain from drilled ice cores 8. Liquid fossil fuels are running out so using them will become cost prohibitive for most applications including transportation and we need alternatives 9. Technical alternatives are available but even at $100 for crude, they are not competitive if the investments need to be written off over the next few years. Hence we need subsidies, and after that the cost can come down. 10. The seawater levels have already started raising, and if they continue to do so at the same rate in the next few decades, which will have an impact on dykes and places like the Netherlands and Bangladesh. 11. The oil business is slowly coming to an end, due to dwindling supplies. Hundreds of millions of people earn a living from petroleum related industries. A lot more is at stake than oil exploration and refining. 12. Our logistics system (including food) will stop working soon due to rising fuel prices 13. If climate change is real and its consequences serious, we leave the planet to our children in an unknown state. So, if you don't believe global warming is real, consider that you (or we) might be wrong and the consequences of dealing with it (if it were to materialize) are so large that it is perhaps worth buying ourselves some insurance. If you don't have a concience and: - are willing to take the risk that global warming might be not real - if you live in a rich country which would probably have enough food, don't mind global food scarcity, and have enough funds to deal with the annoyances like rising water levels - if you don't care about the 1-2 billion people that would die because of famine - if you think that our children are spoilt brats and don't need a clean planet to live on Then at least I think you wouldn't enjoy $100/Gal gas, a crashed economy, 3 out of 4 people in your street coming from Africa, Central America or central Asia that has become inhabitable. For me it is a simple business proposition: the risk of the cost of doing nothing much outweighs the cost of fixing a problem that might not be real. So I don't care if man-made global warming is real, there are enough reasons beyond that to stop burning stuff we got from underground. My suggestion for the course of action is to steer away from carbon-based energy sources where technically reasonably feasible, and write the cost off over the duration of at least 10 years. That means things like biofuels or battery based cars - whatever it takes - and subsidize it with tax on fuel. Gas is $9/Gal here in Finland, and if it were $15/Gal equivalent and I could drive with a carbon-neutral car, I would go for it, voluntarily. That has to be doable with a government-backed financing scheme. And before you guys start throwing mud, I'm not at all a green fanatic: as a matter of fact I have bought in the last 2 months 2 new cars, one with a 3.2L engine and one with a 4.0L. They didn't have any bigger.

[tightsnheels]

This thread brings to mind an issue I don't understand. If we need to cut out carbon emmisions why are we waiting for "Fuel cell technology" to run hydrogen? The technology to run hydrogen in an internal combustion engine has been around for years. If I remember correctly the cost to convert ANY car to run on it is less than $2000 US:silly: I know it could be substantialy more in other places. But the point is that the standard gasoline powered vehicle will run on it with little modifacation.

So why don't we?

T&H

[Bubba136]

I am wondering how governments will handle the monetary crisis that will occur from converting from fossil fuel to an alternative fuel that doesn't rely on oil. The amount of money government collects in taxes is, as you guys already know, phenomenal and, unless they have a plan already on hand, the financial loss is going to be a back-breaker.

[Arctic]

Hydrogen at the moment creates more trouble than it is worth, as there are two separate issues that need dealing with: 1. the generation of power: Hydrogen can be extracted from natural gas or some other non-renewable sources, or from electricity and water. The electricity is often produced from fossil fuels, in case of the US and China mainly from coal. Only a few countries get the majority of their electricity from non-carbon sources, like France (about 80% nuclear). 2. the storage and transportation of power: hydrogen in free form is very difficult to store and cart around. You need many ultra high pressure tanks, you need to store the hydrogen at several hundreds degrees below freezing, and refilling is slow due to the thermal effects that come into play when handling pressurized gas. Just burning hydrogen is possible but not very efficient and has some risks with backfiring. Running it through a fuel cell is more efficient and effectively makes for a hybrid car as well - and then you can benefit from regenerative braking driving up the efficiency even more. But the biggest reason is that you can run hydrogen in bound form through a fuel cell, which makes the fuel much safer and easier to handle. For example, ethanol is one of the liquid forms some fuel cells can take. So you can get power out of ethanol without burning anything and waste nothing.

[hoverfly]

Any body want to cut heating fuel cost by 1/3 to 1/2 with out spending tens of thousands of dollars? Go passive solar. Specifically look at those who built their own panels.

[Dr. Shoe]

I can't believe that there needs to be so much discussion about this. Apparently most people don't understand the concept of statistics.

1. We know that temperature cycles occur naturally with huge impact on life on earth.

2. Current global warming is happening now again, that is a statistical fact.

3. We don't know for sure (ie. 100%) that the current cycle global warming is accelerated by man, but based on historical evidence, the current rate of warming is off the charts.

4. The climate is a very complex ecosystem that no one understands well.

5. The current trend of temperature rise, if continued, will reduce the planet's ability to carry its 6 billion people to about 3 or 4 by mid century, leave alone the 10 billion projected for 2050. This is diet dependent, but assumes the current distribution (Westerners consuming lots of meat and dairy, which is CO2 intensive)

6. CO2 is a very potent greenhouse gas. Despite it's concentration of only a few hundred PPM, it has proven ability to regulate temperature on a planet like earth.

7. There is a strong correlation between CO2 concentration and surface temperature, and that correlation holds for as far as we can go back in time from the data we obtain from drilled ice cores

8. Liquid fossil fuels are running out so using them will become cost prohibitive for most applications including transportation and we need alternatives

9. Technical alternatives are available but even at $100 for crude, they are not competitive if the investments need to be written off over the next few years. Hence we need subsidies, and after that the cost can come down.

10. The seawater levels have already started raising, and if they continue to do so at the same rate in the next few decades, which will have an impact on dykes and places like the Netherlands and Bangladesh.

11. The oil business is slowly coming to an end, due to dwindling supplies. Hundreds of millions of people earn a living from petroleum related industries. A lot more is at stake than oil exploration and refining.

12. Our logistics system (including food) will stop working soon due to rising fuel prices

13. If climate change is real and its consequences serious, we leave the planet to our children in an unknown state.

1. True. There have been a lot of warm periods since pre-historic times. The Dinosaurs may have been killed off by one though to survive 100,000,000 years must mean that they had survived around a 1000 or so warm periods.

2. No dispute there.

3. You are half right. The idea that man has accelerated global warming is only a hypothesis, it isn't even a theory! It is not actually off the charts because there are no charts. Moreover, temperatures have not yet reached those at certain points in history. The only "charts" available are measurements taken since thermometers have been invented. It is true to say that the mean global temperature has increased more in the past 5 years than in the previous 50 years, it is also true to say that CO2 and particulate emmisssions have fallen by a third since 1950.

4. This is too true in fact the climate rarely conforms to any models whatsoever. If it did then weather forecasting would be a doddle.

5. This would only be true if we relied on current food growing fields. One of the dividends of global warming is that it will be possible to grow crops in areas where this is currently impossible. We will also have an extended growing season in many areas allowing multiple crops.

6. This is actully a myth. CO2 does little to regulate temperature. This myth arises from the fact that the atmosphere on Venus is some 80% CO2 and it has very high temperatures. It is also closer to the sun. The fact is that water vapour is also a "greenhouse gas" too and this is the main emmission from fuel cells.

7. No there isn't. In fact there is absolutely no connection between CO2 levels in ice samples and dendochronological evidence. All that can be said is that temperature rises follow elevated CO2 levels by between 50 to 200 years.

8. this is true. However, when you think about the economics the company selling fuel on the forecourt is the same company pumping it from the ground, the price per barrel is irrelevant. It costs the same to pump, it costs the same to transport and it costs the same to process and apart from the overheads the net cost of extraction is nil. The oil companies are only making hay while the sun still shines.

9. Call me a cynic but alternative energy sources will be ready to go the day the last drop of oil is burnt.

10. Of course there are rises in sea level and this is because of global warming which is a natural phenomenon.

11. Hundreds of Millions!? LOL ! I think that you'll find that it's more like tens of thousands. "Hundreds of Millions" would imply the entire population of the United States! Most of those people are minimum wage fodder in petrol stations who will be just as happy working within the industry of whatever alternative energy replaces petroleum.

12. No it won't. Possibly more of our food will be produced locally but haulage will be done by rail hauled by electric locomotives powered by nuclear, wind or solar power. We could well see the return of the horse and cart bringing freight from the depot to the store.

13. I don't think that the consequences will be that serious. We just need to alter our lifestyles to accommodate it.

[hoverfly]

13. I don't think that the consequences will be that serious. We just need to alter our lifestyles to accommodate it.

Take a topical map and figure how much land will be swallowed up by the rise. Consequences are going to be big for many. Where I live goverment is all ready talking about how to handle population migration from such changes. Man created the hole in the ozone layer form HCFC........

[bilomi]

To everyone: Isn't that funny how this topic took over the purpose why we are here in the first place: high heels! It appears nobody will change his/her mind based on what is said here. No one hold the truth. The only fact is, we are in a finite world with a finite amount of ressource. We are using non-renewable ressource at a rate never seen before. Who will have to pay for this? What legacy do we want to leave as a civilisation? So there are no options but to go back to regular sexy topics.

[hoverfly]

To everyone:

Isn't that funny how this topic took over the purpose why we are here in the first place: high heels!

It appears nobody will change his/her mind based on what is said here. No one hold the truth. The only fact is, we are in a finite world with a finite amount of ressource. We are using non-renewable ressource at a rate never seen before. Who will have to pay for this? What legacy do we want to leave as a civilisation?

So there are no options but to go back to regular sexy topics.

Uhm....this is the General Chit Chat section.

[Dr. Shoe]

The problem is is that know one knows the truth about the future because there is no truth yet. We had similar polarised opinion about the Iraq war... some people were saying it was going to bring oil prices down and others were saying that oil prices would rise and that the Arab dominated OPEC would force prices up to "punish" the west. Some said it would be a walk-over and others said that 1000s would die. Here we are debating global warming in the same way. All the scientists can do is to take existing data and extrapolate where it's going to lead. They cannot predict or even forecast the mean global temperature for the next five years let alone the next 50... All they can say is "At current trends..." or "If this continues..."

[Bubba136]

Let’s face it, the truth about both global warming and the war in Iraq depend solely upon your political point of view. The "is it is, or is it aint" position is driven by the agendas of both the far left (socialists) and the far right (conservative).

There are both truths and falsehoods on both sides. Each side "spins" available information to support achievement of their objectives. While I don't think there has been enough "facts" uncovered to prove beyond a doubt that global warming is occurring to the degree the ALGORE lovers would lead you to believe, there is enough truth there to cause us to consider its effect. Likewise, the degree of success in Iaraq isn't as great as the supporters of the war in Iraq want you to accept, there has been a great deal of success in that country.

What is needed is an "unbiased" dialogue to examine all of the information available on both issues. At this time in history, however, strident expression of views is the norm with a shoot first and ask questions later the result.

As has been pointed out in several of the posting in this thread, discussion of either issue, here isn’t productive. Or, is the discussion of other issue s, like terrorism, political systems, religion, etc., because our membership is do diverse and widely located across the entire globe our opinions are bound to be culturally, regionally and politically divergent to such an extent as to make total agreement impossible .

The truth about all of these issues will surface with the passing of time. And, perhaps in the next millennium, humanity (if it is still on earth) will look back on our successes and/or failures and will cause historians of the "next generation" to say.....what a bunch of dummies and or what a bunch of intelligent people, lived back then.

[hoverfly]

Hay lets put it on the bright side, if it get to warm we light off a few hundred mega ton nukes and have a nuclear winter!! JK

[Bubba136]

If you plan on doing that, please wait until after I depart.

[Arctic]

Let’s face it, the truth about both global warming and the war in Iraq depend solely upon your political point of view. The "is it is, or is it aint" position is driven by the agendas of both the far left (socialists) and the far right (conservative).

There are both truths and falsehoods on both sides. Each side "spins" available information to support achievement of their objectives.

True that politics uses the climate change momentum for their own good, but not true in the sense that my (or many people's) opinion on climate follows my political alignment. I'm very liberal (in the traditional meaning, not in the US political one) in my views on economics and about midway otherwise. Not compatible with either the Democratic or Republican message in the US, but nevertheless I'm strongly pro-economy. That is supposed to mean for climate change: "it doesn't exist".

And my opinion is: "There is a fair chance it exists. Let's tackle it for the other reasons and take the climate change risk benefit as a bonus".

Kind of turning a liability into an asset, the carbon free economic model that is. And then we start a company around that and Black Gold 2.0 is among us!

[Bubba136]

Artic posted:

And my opinion is: "There is a fair chance it exists. Let's tackle it for the other reasons and take the climate change risk benefit as a bonus".

Are you a scientist or meteorologists that is engaged in the study of weather or global warming?

While I agree that continuous examination of the global warming phenomenon is wise, I don't believe that applying the drastic measures espoused by the "loony ALGORE environmental wackoo crowd" is warrented and any action should be well thought out and applied only if the results are known to be 100% effective. Because, I am one of those that believe that the conditions on the Sun have far greater affect upon our climate than anything humans can do.