From: Gary Britt 



Antti Kurenniemi wrote:
> "Gary Britt" 
wrote in message
> news:45d474c4{at}w3.nls.net...
>>> just wait until it's over and then be smart after the fact.
Sounds like a
>>> plan for you.
>>>
>> As opposed to your approach which is to take one of the kids pick them up
>> and use them to try and beat the fire out
>
> What kid - what is there to lose by trying to reduce CO2 emissions?


Nothing as long as the methods chosen to reduce them don't cost anything in
terms of current and future prosperity and the accumulation of wealth by
the nations of the world.  Because the connection between man made global
warming and reality isn't strong enough to justify anything else.  This is
a future problem at best that is best solved with future technology not
current technology.  The only applicable current technology is build more
nuke plants all over the world.


>
>
>> in a futile attempt to control something that you can't control.
>
> I'm pretty sure we *can* control how much CO2 (and other shit) we produce.
>

Begs the real question which is:  Does the amount of man made co2 have even
the slightest thing to do with co2 levels in the atmosphere as a whole and
with any perceived global warming.  So far the answers seem to be NO to
both questions.  A recent study found that co2 levels in the atmosphere
vary widely over time and that 300 million years ago the co2 levels were
200 times or more the level currently.  Not a lot of SUV's 300 million
years ago.  This research seems to suggest that ice ages and co2 levels
come and go based upon factors we do not understand and totally UNRELATED
to man made activites.

Gary

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