From: "Robert Comer" 

> And with a 10,000:1 ratio against the most powerful things humans have
> been able to devise in their entire history, you still propose that we
> have rats chance in hell of modifying what the Earth feels like delivering
> upon us?

Yep, I do.

--
Bob Comer


"Mark"  wrote in message
news:44600dcf$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> And with a 10,000:1 ratio against the most powerful things humans have
> been able to devise in their entire history, you still propose that we
> have rats chance in hell of modifying what the Earth feels like delivering
> upon us?  to me>
>
> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
> news:4460062a{at}w3.nls.net...
>>
>> "Geo"  wrote in message
news:445ffe8b$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>> "Robert Comer"  wrote
in message
>>> news:445fde98$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>> possibility.  We've had 95% mass extinctions just because the
>>>> temperature
>>>> went up 10F.
>>>
>>> It seems to me we've had mass extinctions because of abrupt change due
>>> to
>>> meteor strikes or because if ice ages but not because the temperature
>>> went
>>> up. When the temperature goes up, life flourishes.
>>>
>>> Geo.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> The raising of temperature and the release of  frozen methane hydrates
>> from the ocean  may have caused the worst mass extinction in history.
>> It's still subject to debate whether the release was due to global
>> warming, meteor strike or volcanic activity or a combination
>>
>> http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s938770.htm
>>
>> The situation would have been much worse in the Permian era, he said.
>> Ryskin calculated that prehistoric oceans could easily have contained
>> enough methane to liberate an energy about 10,000 times greater than the
>> world's entire nuclear weapons stockpile going off at once.
>>
>
>

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