From: "Geo." 

"John Beckett"  wrote in message
news:gnq6q2l9qj7o82o72cdb2p7o1t24sm2nud{at}4ax.com...

> I outlined the fact that changes to our weather MAY have significant
> effects. Further, if any significant effect occurs, it is likely to cause
> a BAD result (I'm not saying "74 yards of water", I'm saying
that if you
> change a complex system, it's very likely you will not improve on it as
> far as current life is concerned).

And I'm saying that with a complex computer system you may be right but
with self correcting natural systems you define change as bad, not basing
it on the amount of life but basing it on simply change is bad.

Is there more life on this planet during an ice age or a warm period, look
at the fossil record. It's clear warm is good and cold is bad. So if you
accept change is inevitable in a system that is in constant change, which
way do we want to be moving? This is the point I'm trying to make to you.
You keep saying basically "any change is bad" but that's not an
option we are not smart or powerful enough to prevent the earth from
evolving.

Geo.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5