To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (484993 ) 11/1/2003 2:28:42 PM From: Thomas A Watson Respond to of 769670 Leiberman is basically a technologoy, igoramus and is quite clueless on economics and has no concept of what truth is. For example, lieberman proposes to burn coal and pump the CO2 into the ground. How stupid is that. And his is a kyoto retard proponent. Nonetheless, with few exceptions, all the climate models predict warm-ings over the next century that are essentially linear. It seems logical to now let nature adjudicate what the proper rate for warming is; this is also shown in Figure 45.9. By the middle of this century, we are left with an additional surface warming of 0.65°C to 0.75°C, with 0.75°C to 0.85°C in the winter half year and 0.60°C to 0.65°C in the summer. Interestingly, these 50-year figures are quite similar to the warming that occurred during the late 20th century. What have we to show for a century of warming? In 1900 life expectancy at birth in the United States was 42 years. After 100 years of global warming, it was exactly twice that number, 84 years. Urban infrastructure in the United States has adapted so well to both average and warmed climates that heat-related deaths are disappearing. After a global warming of 0.6°C, U.S. crop yields quintupled. World food production per capita has increased by nearly 50 percent in the last half century. An untold story is that carbon dioxide itself makes most crops grow better: by the year 2050 that direct stimulation of planetary greening will feed an increment of 1.5 billion people the equivalent of today's diet. The Kyoto Protocol Does Nothing about Global Warming No known mechanism can stop global warming in the near term. Interna-tional agreements, such as the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Frame-work Convention on Climate Change, will have no detectable effect on average temperature within any reasonable policy time frame of 50 years or so-even with full compliance. Climate modelers at the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research calculate that full compliance with the Kyoto Protocol by all signatory nations would reduce global surface temperature by 0.07°C by 2050, and 0.14°C by 2100. Congress should note the dangers of an expensive environmental accord with no benefit. The Senate should consider the Kyoto Protocol for ratification, with the resultant negative vote paving the way for more rational environmental regulation.cato-subscriptions.org