In the absence of time-scale measures, I think we can look at data concerning the greenhouse effect and see some merit in the theory. We know the greenhouse effect exists, otherwise, the heat escaping from the earth would cause the planet to be inhospitable. Also, there is good data suggesting that pollutants caused by humans hold more heat than what is in the atmosphere naturally. I think the most serious problem is the concentration of methane, which has alomst doubled in the last decade.
I understand your position on this, and share concern over policy influenced by alarmists (who I think are overreacting) affecting production and capitalism. It is this dilema that motivated me to study policies concerning emissions. I'm neither a climatologist or an economist, but there are some options that could limit emissions while benefiting producers, namely creating a market for emmision permits, which can be traded and sold.
posted on 10/03/2003 7:50:11 AM PDT
(You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows)
Those liberal alarmists have their hooks into you, that's for sure! There is plenty of evidence proving that nothing man does short of nuclear weapons can change the global enviornment. Nature takes care of itself.
posted on 10/03/2003 7:54:25 AM PDT
(Countdown to 27 World Championships...)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson