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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: alan w who wrote (14784)	11/13/1998 2:51:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 67261

What I think is that without any evidence that we are contributing even 1% of the greenhouse gasses going into the atmosphere, it is absurd to, at the insistence of a few left wing extremists, alter the lifestyle of everyone. You may think what you want, Alan. Human activity has been increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (mostly carbon dioxide from combustion of coal, oil, and gas; plus a few other trace gases). There is no scientific debate on this point. At rates of increase observed over the past few decades, the concentration of carbon dioxide will be double that of pre-industrial levels in about 2050. (http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ol/climate/globalwarming.html#Q2 ) There's no scientific debate on this point, but let's debate it anyway, eh? In the proper limbotic fashion, where anybody who disagrees with the correct conservative political viewpoint is an idiot. Atmospheric pollution by man has decreased since 1970. Has this increased global warming? What's normally called "Atmospheric pollution" isn't carbon dioxide, Alan. You do understand that, don't you? U.S. Gas Output Is Rising nytimes.com Emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases grew 3.4 percent in 1996, the latest year for which comprehensive estimates are available, the Energy Department said in a report. The department attributed the increase to strong economic growth, unusually severe weather and increased use of coal by electric utilities. Emissions from energy use in residential and commercial buildings grew 6.3 percent and 5.5 percent, respectively, despite programs intended to increase energy efficiency. . . . In a treaty on climate change signed by 160 nations in 1992, the United States and other industrial countries pledged to reduce their emissions of such gases to the 1990 level by 2000. But American emissions in 1996 were 7.4 percent above 1990 levels, the report said. For some time the Clinton Administration has forecast that by the end of the decade, emissions of the gases in the United States will be 13 percent higher than in 1990. With the economy still growing and people driving farther in cars that use more gasoline per mile, the upward trend is widely expected to continue. A year old story, but I doubt things have been reduced. Growth in energy use hasn't been what it was predicted to be in the past, but worldwide, it does continue to grow. One eruption of Mt. Saint Helens put over 100 times the amount of greenhouse gasses into the air than man has during the past 100 years. Would you like to substantiate that claim? To add to the usual "substantive debate" here, as opposed to the scientific kind? Perhaps you're referring to sulfur oxides, which washes out of the atmosphere quickly, and tend to form particulates which reduce warming? Or are the scientists who measure carbon dioxide levels all in some conspiracy to report bogus numbers? Cheers, Dan.