[lit-ideas] Re: Shadows, Fog, and Money

  • From: "Andreas Ramos" <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 11:55:28 -0700

From: "Paul Stone" <pas@xxxxxxxx>

> This is precisely the thing I'm talking about. Of COURSE CO2 levels have
> gone up as we have gotten rid of a lot of green plants (that absorb it) and
> as we burn fuel (creating by-prodcut CO2, but to say "either it will be
> really warm or really cold" is hedging. Hey guess what, next Thursday, it's
> either going to be cold or warm. You can't possibly say that "global
> warming" will cause an ice-age. It wouldn't be global warming now wouldn't
> it.

Ah, okay. I see the problem. That's the nature of the global climate system. By 
pushing one 
parameter, an effect can go up, up, up, and suddenly it collapses.

It doesn't mean that the parameter didn't have an effect (because it produced 
opposite 
results). And it doesn't mean that we're playing both sides of the coin toss 
(both heads and 
tails).

If it helps, then stop thinking about the effect (the warming) and look at the 
CO2 levels. 
There's no doubt whatsoever that this is skyrocketing and that it's due to 
human activity. 
And then ask what the result of that will be.

Whatever the result (warming or ice age), it will be catastrophic. North 
America will have 
either a 30-year drought, effectively making it into a wasteland, or it will be 
covered with 
glaciers. We're going to get one or the other, and either one will be very bad.

yrs,
andreas
www.andreas.com

------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 06-2005