Re: Human vs. natural influences on the environment
email@example.com (charliew) wrote:
>A lot of environmental posters have the nasty tendency of
>only worrying about the variables that "prove" their point.
>If these guys started attempting to worry about all of the
>variables that they can identify, they will find many
>negative feedback loops that they haven't thought about. At
>this point, I am tempted to believe that many of these guys
>cannot conceptualize of more than two or three variables at
>a time. Too bad. A full understanding of the subject
>material may require an understanding of dozens or perhaps
>hundreds of simultaneous variables. Do you guys really
>think that you are up to this task?
Oh, I think we can conceptualize all sorts of interesting stuff,
and you're right, some of it suggests that warming won't be so
bad. However, as you correctly reason, there is approximately
a 50% chance that it will be worse than the consensus prediction.
I think that some of us feel that it is folly to be pumping
large amounts of greenhouse gas emissions into the equation
when we have little understanding of what the outcome will be.
The group of many experts that IS researching the problem tells
us that it is real. You offer no expertise in rebuttal except
to say the problem is very complicated, so they probably don't
know for sure. I don't find this either very convincing or
Director of Communications
American Wind Energy Association
PS Support renewable energy! Visit the Electronic Lobbyist For
Renewable Energy Web Site: