| Mark Probert 2005-09-26, 5:22 pm |
| PeterB wrote:
> jdeere2312@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
>
> If weather tends to coil in the manner of most natural processes,
> waiting for systemic changes sizeable enough to create a shift, we may
> be unable to observe weather changes linked to particulate levels in
> real time. Though certain key data isn't supportive of global warming,
> the computer models may still be right. Think of what happens if you
> are throwing bread onto a lake in the wind, in an effort to feed ducks.
Allow me a digression....I live in a well fouled water fowl area.
Feeding bread of any sort to ducks, geese, etc. causes them to develop
severe diarrhea, and this gets washed into the waters. This makes the
waters nutrient rich, and allows algae to grow far more than an
unaffected area would allow. Too much algae and the fish die. Next time
I am near the local duck pond, I will take a picture of just how
disgusting it looks.
> Perhaps half the time, the wind carries the bread closer to them, but
> the other half of the time it disperses it into fragments or carries it
> beyond them. Existing atmospheric, solar, thermal, and weather
> phenomenon are already intact systems that may be concealing the
> incremental affects of industrial pollution, even as the human variable
> continues to foment. It's difficult to know the total impact of our
> intervention until a sizeable shift occurs, but by then it will be too
> late.
You have just got to read "Year of the Jackpot" by Heinlein.
This might explain the Pentagon's position and concerns as
> discussed at http://www.ems.org/climate/pentagon...te_change.html.
> By the way, global warming doesn't necessarily forecast warmer
> temperatures globally; some regions of earth would actually become
> COLDER.
I have looked for something along those lines...colder areas, and have
yet to find any.
|