Oh, come on. You must have mis-written. "population density" and mid-to high-rises create a "heat-island effect" in and around cities; note that, when the suburbs get a foot of snow in winter, the nearby city will usually get much less snow. That doesn't require population or population density to increase; it has been known and proven for many decades. There are even more subtle, recently reported effects (better thermometers) of suburbs versus rural areas. But, Tom, the density of humans on the planet is quite low. I have it on good authority that the density of humans on the wet portion of the planet is close to zero. That takes up 77% or so of the planet, and involves a type of substance that is very good at absorbing solar power, and which is dynamically capable of distributing the results. The density of humans across the land is still quite low. Ever seen photos of Alaska? Canada? Nevada? Kansas? New Mexico? Mexico? Non-urban California? Arizona? Texas? Nebraska? Montana? Idaho? Georgia? Oklahoma? I can go on, but I won't incluye Western Europe in the list. Cities certainly have effects and affects on their micro-climates. A minute portion of the planet is devoted to providing the base for cities. To say that it's silly to claim -- which I never did, by the way -- that we have no effect on the planet. It's silly to NOT think that the oceans have much more effect than do we, and it's ABSURD to use climate models that don't have even a single line of code to take into account "solar warming/cooling." John Willkie -----Mensaje original----- De: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] En nombre de Tom Barry Enviado el: Thursday, November 13, 2008 4:30 AM Para: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Asunto: [opendtv] Re: What does it take to convince I can't prove anything about long term climate change but it is obvious humans can have a dramatic effect upon their environment as population density increases. For instance in this country the air is observably different around any major city, to the naked eye, or nose. At least in that sense it is silly to claim we can have no effect. - Tom Dale Kelly wrote: >> By the way, doesn't the climate change all the time? > > Yes indeed, see the research from Easterbrook posted by Craig. He makes the > case that climate change is predictably cyclic in nature. Add to that the > random events such as major volcanic activity or meteor strikes and the > climate can vary widely and quickly. > >> Have humans always been in control of this? More likely, >> they have never had much if any of an impact. > > I can't disagree with you or prove otherwise but I do suggest that the human > dynamic has changed sufficiently over the past 60 years or so that the > potential for climate change based upon our activity has become an issue. > After all, the world's population has increased dramatically during that > period as has our industrial activities. I don't know that this has impacted > the climate but it certainly should not be dismissed given that warming has > increased dramatically over the past 50 years. > > Dale > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways: > > - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org > > - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways: - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways: - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.