Our media, and so are the rest of the world would not articulate the facts that illuminates the falsehood of the global warming theory. It is only that, a theory, just like the evolution theory, like the Acid rain, like the Asbestos hazards.
The EPA spent more then one billion dollars testing all major lakes in the USA to confirm that "Acid Rain theory. They published a report saying that THERE IS NO ACID RAIN! Bush #41, ignored that report in the 1990 Acid rain legislation. He wanted to be loved by the left, we know what happened!
Of course it is. Where did you get the idea that I needed to be told that? Kyoto is all about transferring money through the World Bank so that the big shots can make money on investments for carbon credits. Its purpose has nothing to do with climate change.
I can go through many illustrations, but it is very easy for you to find if you care to read more in-depth analysis.
I've read Dr. Singer's work. I think he has it about right. There is a pretty good paper on atmospheric CO2 available at The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine. All I said was that linearizing the data was an oversimplification. I could have commented about the adsorption of reflected IR in the first few meters, not miles.
No, that's not what the report said.
First off, here's a map of the pH of collected precipitation (bulk) for 2001:
Normal rain pH is around pH 5.5 (which you can see in the West). Acid rain is precipitation that has lower pH than normal. As you can see, that happens out East, where rain absorbs sulfur from primarily coal-burning power plants. The bulk pH of this precipitation is about 1 pH point lower, which means that it is 10 times more acidic.
But this is for bulk, averaged precipitation. Single events -- particularly "acid fogs", which occur in the eastern mountain ranges -- can have much lower pH, even below pH 3. pH this low can be particularly damaging to plants, especially if they live in stressful environments such as higher elevations.
So what about the report? Basically, it said that the threat of acid rain to fresh water bodies was less than originally estimated, due to the capacity for soils and bedrock to neutralize acid precipitation. This does not mean that there is no threat; there are still very sensitive areas where the bedrock and soil has minimal acid-neutralizing capacity, such as New York's Adirondacks. It turns out that in many areas where acid-neutralizing capacity was expected to be low based on bedrock geology, the presence of secondary minerals as microcrystals within the bedrock and soils provides sufficient acid-neutralizing capacity to keep streams and lakes in those areas from suffering the effects of acidic runoff.
It's good to keep your facts straight on things like this -- particularly when something is being done about it.