SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Land Shark who wrote (29296)6/16/2010 5:57:32 PM
From: longnshort1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 36917
 
how do you know it's not. Mankind has benefited from past warming periods



To: Land Shark who wrote (29296)6/16/2010 8:24:30 PM
From: Maurice Winn4 Recommendations  Respond to of 36917
 
Kant, people spend a lot of money on anthropogenic heat for their houses. They do that because it is highly beneficial. They also buy anthropogenic heat to make glass houses warmer. That is highly profitable.

<Now the "expert" weighs in tha AGW is "beneficial". What rot. You don't have a clue, bub. >

CO2 in the air is a good thing. Contrary to the EPA ideas, CO2 is not a pollutant. Before the ecosphere stripped the CO2 from the atmosphere and buried it permanently in limestone and other carbon graveyards, there was 2000 parts per million.

In the great tragedy of the commons in which plants fought each other for the last vestiges of carbon, they got right down to 280 parts per million.

Luckily for them, and us, people learned how to recover coal and hydrocarbons and burn them to release the carbon back into the ecosphere. Now Gaia has more CO2 and reglaciation might [if the Global Warming Alarmists are right] be kept at bay.

Gaia acts to preserve herself. She has produced humans who do that by recycling in a sustainable way the carbon which had been buried.

This is a difficult concept to grasp, so you will have to read it several times and cogitate.

Mqurice