Post by Lynn McGuire
But, the USA is built on cheap energy. And cheap hydrocarbons. Look at
all of the new ethylene plants being built along the Gulf Coast. To
change this without being 100% sure is to just ask for a financial
disaster in the USA. Of course, some people just want to burn down the USA.
I seem to recall you had to move fairly recently because your old house turned
out to be in a flood plain that got used every once in a while, and more so
recently with all the extra energy being shoved into the atmosphere and weather
So, did you buy the previous house without being 100% sure it would never get
caught in a flood disaster, causing you to under go a small financial disaster?
Post by Lynn McGuire
And please don't tell me that Global Warming XXXXXX XXXXXX Climate
Change XXXXXX XXXXX Climate Disruption being caused by mankind is a 100%
Nothing in science is "sure". You can get that in math. And you're an engineer,
not a scientist, and specifically not a climate scientist, so you're not
qualified to say that there are models with better fits to the available data
that are somehow being ignored or suppressed.
Our best understanding is that it's MOST certainly human-activity-caused. We
have no clue abut ANYTHING else that could have caused such upticks, at such
an accelerating rate, without accompanying signs that (for example) the Sun's
solar constant had started increasing, or volcanoes had suddenly become much
more common, or the Solar System had moved into an implausibly-shaped zone of
reflective dust, etc.
You don't have another model. You just have serious financial motives for
claiming that this model can't possibly be right. Adding bad axioms to your
reasoning makes you end up like (for another example) creation-'science' folks;
_given_ that the Bible is inerrant and that (a derived axiom) the Universe
was created around 6,023 years ago, of COURSE evolution is a sham and a fraud.
Because there hasn't been enough TIME. Ditto plate tectonics, just about all of
astrophysics, and much of particle physics... because the observed results
disagree seriously with the bad axioms. So they have to squirm violently to
get quasi-reasoning that explains the observations...
Dave, it's painful to watch, but they're doing as well as they can given the
rotten apples they ate off the Tree of Knowledge
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
my gatekeeper archives are no longer accessible :( / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.