Here is the EPA's site about global warming. <http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/index.html> And while you are at it, the department of energy has one too. <http://www.energy.gov/environ/index.html> Don't trust the government? How about a major oil company? <http://www.bp.com/_nav/world.htm> (click to climate change) Tom said: NPR, while occasionally entertaining, is so far to the liberal left that there is little they say that one can take to the bank. I would be highly suspect of any "scientific" findings they report. I am not up to date on the latest findings on global warming; but if I wanted to get an accurate balanced assessment, I sure wouldn't go by NPR. Where would you go? Rush Limbaugh? I also heard a report that 60% of the worlds corals will die within 30 years unless measures are taken. This was broadcast by the BBC, are they biased too? Tom said: I agree that Americans often operate in crisis management mode; but I will wait until there is at least a consensus amonst most responsible scientists that global warming even exists before I start to worry about it. Tom Dowling I have a hunch that Tom is being somewhat of an antagonist......I hope. No scientist denies, no SCIENTIST, that global warming exists. There is considerable disagreement about the rate of change and why the earths temperature is rising and what to do about it. I might add that the united states, while consuming many times more energy per capita than the rest of the world, is the only major industrial nation that hasn't signed the KYOTO treaty. Why? There is a fear that reducing emissions would create an economic crisis. - - - - - - - - - - - shawn *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
I recently attended the Confluence trade show, primarily white water rafting outfitters in Tampa. The EPA had a stand and the entire stand was devoted to Global Warming. It wasn't an if or what we can do to prevent Global warming, it was about how global warming WILL affect the environment and related commerce and how to adapt to the forthcoming conditions. The were brochures on what fish will disappear and what will replace them, coastal flooding and similar pamphlets. cu *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
On Tue 12 Dec 2000, anomad wrote: > Here is the EPA's site about global warming. > <http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/index.html> > > And while you are at it, the department of energy has one too. > <http://www.energy.gov/environ/index.html> These agencies are in the business of collecting monies towards solving problems. Global warming is a problem which fits well within there range of problems which could expand their budgets. If a problem allows for the raising of huge quantities of money, yet there is in fact no problem, would you not say, Shawn, that this is the kind of problem that you would welcome? I wouldn't look to the gov't for straight answers on this subject. > Don't trust the government? How about a major oil company? > <http://www.bp.com/_nav/world.htm> (click to climate change) Would you think that a little ol' oil co. might tell half truths for political reasons? Say it's not so! > Where would you go? Rush Limbaugh? I would go to the Cato Institute, a prestigious think tank. Here is a link to an article from Cato, written by an MIT meteorology prof.: http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg15n2g.html Every day people being conned out of there money are made aware of the cons they are falling victim to, and they merely state that they know better, promptly get on the phone and commit more funds to their "supposed" charity of choice. Shawn, if you don't believe an MIT meteorology prof. and the CATO Institute, then give til it hurts. ho ho ho.... It is that time of year, you know. -- Mike McNally mmcnally3_at_prodigy.net ps ...my favorite line from the paper was, when speaking of climate scientists, Prof Lindzen states, "...among those actively involved in research and publishing frequently in peer-reviewed research journals, none believes that any man-caused global warming has been identified so far." ...give til it hurts *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
> No scientist denies, no SCIENTIST, that global warming exists. There is > considerable disagreement about the rate of change and why the earths > temperature is rising and what to do about it. You know what disturbs me the most about this whole thing.... Scientist have this wierd idea that if they suggest a "cure" for something, the whole world will rally to enact the cure, and that the compliance rate with the "cure" will be adquately high. It probably is possible for the US, Japan, and maybe Western Europe to comply with a suggested "cure"; on the other hand it is extremely naive to believe that China, Russia, Mexico, Brazil, the Congo, Egypt, India, Pakistan, { ad a bunch...}, would even come close to compliance. They *might* be encouraged to pass laws, but they will be observed only in the breech. Thus, global warming is not only going to happen, it is unavoidable. [prove me wrong, please]. Since I believe that global warming is unavoidable, I have a different set of questions that no one is attempting to answer right now. What possible adaptations can we make to OFFSET the economic and social consequences that will be happening over the next few centuries. Can we grow citrus in Tennesee? Can North Dakota have a winter wheat crop? Can Texas and Florida produce and sustain tropical agriculture? Can the federal BLM and FS buy up land below 20 ft MSL to reduce future development in areas that will be innundated? I figure if the feds can dish out hundreds of billions in checks to various beneficiaries, surely a couple billion a year for land acquisition could be set aside throughout the next century. To me, all the scientists suggesting "reduce that", "change that" are acting like the king who stood before the tide and proclaimed that it should stay back. [Yeah, I know the actual story, but it still makes a good visualization]. The tide came despite all his human authority. Had he invested his entire army into stopping the tide, he would still have failed. Had he spent every last resource of his kingdom, he still would have failed. Global warming is simply an irrevocable, unavoidable fact that we might as well figure out how to adapt to. While we are at it, we might as well also try to anticipate any opportunities that it may provide. Reason why the US should not sign, nor ratify KYOTO? Simple. Kyoto will not even make a dent in stopping global warming. Reason: See list above of countries that will {collectively and some individually] far outstrip our emission levels in the coming century. We should use our resources to analyze, predict, compensate, and adapt to the new climate patterns. Richard Walker Conroe, TX http://people.txucom.net/~rwwamtek/kayak_log.html *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
"R. Walker" wrote: [in response to:] > > No scientist denies, no SCIENTIST, that global warming exists. There is > > considerable disagreement about the rate of change and why the earths > > temperature is rising and what to do about it. > You know what disturbs me the most about this whole thing.... Scientist have this > wierd idea that if they suggest a "cure" for something, the whole world will rally to > enact the cure, and that the compliance rate with the "cure" will be adquately high. > It probably is possible for the US, Japan, and maybe Western Europe to comply > with a suggested "cure"; on the other hand it is extremely naive to believe that > China, Russia, Mexico, Brazil, the Congo, Egypt, India, Pakistan, { ad a bunch...}, > would even come close to compliance. They *might* be encouraged to pass laws, > but they will be observed only in the breech. Thus, global warming is not only > going to happen, it is unavoidable. [prove me wrong, please]. Well, I was going to allow the rant and rave crew have this and stay out of it, but Richard's "... Scientists[s] have this weird idea ..." comment is so far off the mark I have to defend the scientific community: 1. This topic is kinda off the mark for Paddlewise. I would suggest we give it a rest after the next day or so (no, my ego does not require me to have the last word; this will be my only post on the subject). What is your opinion on giving it a rest, Jackie? 2. Richard's characterization of what scientists say is off the mark. As far as I can tell, quite a few prominent scientists with good credentials in climatology have laid out the consequences of "doing nothing," to the best of their ability to see that far in the future. And, other experts have suggested ways to minimize the human-caused part of global warming. Yet others have suggested "we can't predict this stuff very well." That scientists have entered the political arena is natural. What other professional group would you expect to have useful and authoritative information on global warming? Politicians? Sociologists? 3. Peter C from OZ has lucidly summarized our degree of uncertainty about narrow predictions for climate change. That is probably the fairest categorization of the situation I have seen on Paddlewise. There is much disagreement in the scientific community about whether there is a cause-and-effect relationship between generation of so-called greenhouse gases and global warming, although Kevin Whilden has a couple of pointers to stuff that suggests there may be such a relationship for CO2. And, it is tough to pick out effects we cause from what the earth/sun system would do if we were not here. 4. This situation: "scientists disagree on global warming" or "scientists can't prove there will (or won't) be global warming" is **normal** in scientific questions. Science is just a tried and true way of testing hypotheses, winnowing out the bad ones, and elevating the ones that succeed in accounting for what we can observe. Those hypotheses **change** over time, as we accommodate new information. This is frustrating for folks who want absolute proof. Sometimes there is no absolute proof. **Sometimes** a hypothesis becomes so well established by testing it innumerable ways that it becomes an "accepted theory" and we rarely go about looking for places where it fails. Climate models are in their infancy. In a hundred years, we might have really good ones. It's too bad we don't have longer life spans so we can be around to know if the current global warming concerns are valid or not. This is my last, and only, post on this subject. -- Dave Kruger Astoria, OR long-time science teacher *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
"What possible adaptations can we make to OFFSET the economic and social consequences that will be happening over the next few centuries. " Heavy stuff, Mr. Walker, your unasked questions be. Concur, but definitely within the framework of attacking the problem and making a difference. All those pounds of gasoline we put in our cars have to go somewhere. Is there a better way? Which is one reason why I paddle. Can't say I've ever had more fun than on a motocross bike, but the arrival of a family requiring a breadwinner with no broken bones coincided with a realization of what an evironmentally degradating activity that was. So I focused on equally rewarding pastimes, and the boat was a natural evolution. Just wish I could put in in the back yard. And it appears that next century I might be able to... Scott Stephens Jax Beach, FL 17' above sea level *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:19 PDT