From: "Geo." 

"Phil Payne"  wrote in
message news:45954de9{at}w3.nls.net...

> Doesn't anyone realise that if global warming were not primarily due to
> fossil fuels we would have to cut our output of greenhouse gases even more
> drastically?

Why? Why do you think it would make any significant difference at all? If
the earth want's to balance something out, we sure as hell are not going to
convince her to stop.

> Fact: the Earth _is_ warming.  The measurements and statistics are
> unimpeachable.
>
> So what is causing this?  Is it just part of a natural cycle, as the
> extreme
> right of the GOP - oilmen to a man - would have us believe?  Or are we
> causing it?

Good, at least you admit we don't know. However I would like to point out
the fact that this warmer/colder cycle has happened many times in the past,
previous to man and during man's existance. With that in mind doesn't it
make MORE sense to assume it's not us than to assume it is us?

> If it's part of a natural cycle, where will it end?  All the way to a 50
> metre sea level rise?
>
> If we're causing it, we have a BIG lever to pull on.  If Nature is causing
> it, we only have a small lever and we have to pull much harder on it.

Pull as hard as you want, you can't even make a storm detour or knock out a
tiny little tornado and you think you are going to tell the whole planet
what to do?

Geo.

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