Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (431006)	7/22/2003 11:11:29 AM
From: DavesM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

TigerPaw, What the hell are you writing about? In 2000, Greenhouse gas emissions had their biggest increase in years? George W. Bush didn't become President till 2001! In fact, greenhouse emissions from the United States decreased in 2001. Your Article again. "The new figures, compiled by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, show that the United States released 1,558 million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere in 2000, up 41 million tons from 1999. It was the biggest U.S. increase in years. commondreams.org;

To: TigerPaw who wrote (431006)	7/22/2003 1:16:10 PM
From: miraje	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

What he does not want to report is the steadily increasing actual amount of greenhouse gasses released in the United States That's good news. What's bad news for the anti-human, anti-growth eco-nuts is the actual science of "global warming". Read the article below and then go out and cruise in your SUV. I encourage anyone who's interested in this topic to read the entire article. Here are a few excerpts: sepp.org The Scientific Case against the Global Climate Treaty by S. Fred Singer ...see the actual data supporting some of the major scientific conclusions about climate change. Those conclusions are that: · There is no current global warming and little to be expected in the future. · The past, both recent and geologic, has seen large and rapid natural changes in temperature. · Any onset of warmer temperatures would be expected to produce a drop in sea level, not a rise. · The science of climate change is not "settled" or "compelling," and there is hardly any consensus within the informed scientific community. At this point, policymakers who promote the Kyoto Protocol appear determined to impose severe economic hardships on much of the world's population through energy taxes and energy rationing. The United States Senate, which ultimately must be persuaded to ratify the Protocol, has voted 95-0 against such schemes, in the absence of scientific justification. Many labor unions, industries and thoughtful citizens appear to agree with the Senate... ...Rising Temperatures Could Have Positive Effects Possible climate changes from human activities need to be considered from the perspective of natural changes. The geologic record shows natural changes that were larger and more rapid than those predicted by many computer models, and certainly larger than can be expected on the basis of extrapolation of observed temperature trends. Nevertheless, one should examine the potential impact of even a moderate temperature increase. Judging from the climate record of the last 3,000 years of human history, climate consequences of a greenhouse warming should be generally beneficial. One would expect severe weather to be less frequent because of (calculated) reduced equator-to-pole temperature gradients. In fact, the frequency and intensity of hurricanes have decreased over the past 50 years, although the reason for this is not known. The most feared consequence of global warming has been a catastrophic rise in sea level, resulting in coastal flooding and the disappearance of some islands. But new research indicates that increased ocean evaporation would lead to more rain--and therefore to more ice accumulation in the polar regions. As such, sea levels may actually drop. An empirical study of sea level change and sea-surface temperatures of the past century appears to point in that direction. As far as agriculture is concerned, the combination of warmer weather and increased CO2 would be beneficial. More CO2 promises rapid plant growth and, at the same time, reduced water consumption because of reduced evapo-transpiration from leaves. The climate warming that has been calculated would be most noticeable at higher latitudes, primarily in the winter and at night, and would result in fewer frosts and a longer growing season. Farmers can adjust to local climate changes - as they have in the past - with improved technology and proper crop selection. Higher CO2 Levels May Not Be "Dangerous" One of the often expressed concerns has been that ongoing atmospheric changes could reach a "dangerous" level that might cause climate to become extremely unstable, or precipitate a sudden switch to a new climate state that would be detrimental to human existence. Again, looking at the climate record, there have been many large climate fluctuations, but nothing that would lend support to the idea of a climate "surprise." If anything, the variability of climate was greater during the last Ice Age, when CO2 levels were less than 200 parts per million, than during the most recent 10,000 years of the warm interglacial (the Holocene), with CO2 levels at 280 ppm.