Junk Science = a term of derision applied to theories not understood or in opposition to ones own interest. Frequently used by some of the great scientific minds of our time like John Stossell or Rush Limbug.

I agree that lack of knowledge is not a reason for inaction. However, the notion that reducing emissions can't be done without harming the economy is a fallacy. There is no requirement that emissions be reduced in stupid cost-ineffective ways. It has been shown time and again that simple energy saving measures can save individuals and businesses money. Building and operating alternative energy systems creates jobs at home. Reducing demand for imported oil by improving automobile gas mileage and replacing some gasoline with ethanol improves our balance of trade. The only economy to be harmed is that of Exxon and similar companies that refuse to change. On the whole, building a clean sustainable energy infrastructure will be very good for the economy.

Excuse me. I err'd obviously. I guess you'll just have to chalk this one up to dumbass-american-itis. We're all like this you know?

Edit:

Also, My love of my personal vehicle far outweights the care I have that our atmosphere is getting warmer. Thus I feel absolutely no guilt in gassing up my totally impractical 12mpg two door SUV every week at a cost of $60+USD. My budget can afford my driving habits until gas hits $7.50 a gallon. GULP GULP GULP baby!

Other things I enjoy and I'm not ashamed to admit:
1) Eating huge amounts of food knowing full well that people around the globe are starving.
2) Enjoying all the benefits of a private medical insurance plan. I was once not covered by insurance and had to front the costs of all my diabetic supplies. It wasn't bad at all, but having insurance sure is NICE!
3) Shooting game animals for sport.
4) Telling off someone who preaches to me about how I need to change in order to save the world.
5) Donuts. I love donuts. As a diabetic, you can see that I am self destructive.

One way we adjust is through war, but not the only one. Death of the less adapted for natural causes (temperature changes, floods, etc.) is another one, while the adoption of more adequate rules for living (surviving) in the new conditions is probably the best one. It is very unlikely that all people will adopt new rules, so Darwinian selection will probably settle part of the issue - and wars are to be expected in this case.

Since we are not sure of the depth and speed of change, I think the first step is to be ready to accept changes. With luck (time), nature will show us the types of change required.

Also, the whole we "don't want to hurt the economy" thing is kind of funny - if you agree that warming is taking place, and you understand that there are undesirable consequences as a result, the future impact to the economy will probably be worse then than it would be now to start addressing things, even if the supposed uncertainties are taken into account. Worrying about the $10 you might need to spend now to avoid spending $100 in the future is pretty silly.

[/quote] I agree that lack of knowledge is not a reason for inaction. However, the notion that reducing emissions can't be done without harming the economy is a fallacy. . . .On the whole, building a clean sustainable energy infrastructure will be very good for the economy. [/quote]

We all spend lots of time in our cars as a daily commute to work. Most of us are 9-5, 5 days a week.

Fortunately, I'm able to work 12 hour shifts, (by choice)3 days per week, saving 40% of commuting time when compared to a 5 day worker.

If we made this option available to more, or even all workers, the savings in fuel, pollution, road and vehicle maintenance would be enormous. Plus, I consider the 36 hour week an enormous improvement in my quality of life.

What is needed is leadership, at all levels.

Guys:

A foot rise we could handle. Three foot would mean an end to one of the best sailing spots in the US. The Texas City Dike. See www.tcdyc.com for info.

Doug Snell
Hobie 17
Sunfish
Soon to be Mystere 4.3
www.tcdyc.com

I think that's fine. However, if you support Federal rules to improve fuel economy, you will be able to drive longer without breaking your budget.

I don't like big cars, never have. That should be good news to you, because the less fuel I burn the more for you!

So, unless you want to be forced out of your gas guzzler by your self imposed budgetary restraint, support better fuel economy!

Hey, if it comes down to a "waterworld" scenario, at least we can all zoom around like Kevin Costner on our own ORMA's right?
(and drink our own urine too)

The big questions today are silly: who will spend the $10, how and where, followed by who and where will the $100 savings be enjoyed.

This attempts to put one part of the world or one group of people in advantage are silly. Nature doesn't care much about it. The real way to obtain an advantage is to adapt in time for the changing environment.

It is like hurricane preparation: politicians discuss endlessly where to assign resources until homes are destroyed and they are forced into action. The difference is that climate changes may not give a second chance to a significant part of humanity.

You're being silly (or is it dumb?) again. NOT ALWAYS!

Since you have switched from climate to war and seem to be of the "war is never the answer" crowd, let me point out a few examples of when we (the US) and the rest of the world didn't go to war, but followed the hallowed UN in their leadership to stem injustices and atrocities.

Darfur; the killing is winding down as there are few left to kill. 500,000 civilians killed, 2.5 million terrorized, raped or displaced.

Cambodia; 1.7 million lives lost

Iraq; 300,000 murdered by Saddam

Rwanda; 800,000 murdered

the Balkans; 10,00 died (a trifling by comparison).

All lives lost while the UN led the way with missions, studies, reports, resolutions and diplomatic efforts. What a wonderful record--we didn't go to war.

David
H20781

[
Since you have switched from climate to war and seem to be of the "war is never the answer" crowd, let me point out a few examples of when we (the US) and the rest of the world didn't go to war, but followed the hallowed UN in their leadership to stem injustices and atrocities.

Darfur; the killing is winding down as there are few left to kill. 500,000 civilians killed, 2.5 million terrorized, raped or displaced.

Cambodia; 1.7 million lives lost

Iraq; 300,000 murdered by Saddam

Rwanda; 800,000 murdered

the Balkans; 10,00 died (a trifling by comparison).

All lives lost while the UN led the way with missions, studies, reports, resolutions and diplomatic efforts. What a wonderful record--we didn't go to war.

David
H20781 [/quote]

Murder is the wrong term. These are crimes against humanity of the worst magnitude.

I seem to recall some societal anthropologist or historian saying that the true sign of a civilization in decline is the culture of "mindless self-indulgence".

Not being an anarchist (except sailing!) or one of those guys with a "End of the World" sign, it would seem that most "First" world countries are very close to this culture.

In the US, for example, the top selling items are IPOD, GAMEBOY and X-Box. Microsoft has switched from industry leader in business software to gaming.

Our biggest health threat is obesity. The economics of recreational drugs now approach that of legitimate industry.

We've switched from the "industrial economy" to the "information economy" to the "entertainment economy".

There are more US citizens graduating with sports & fitness related degrees than engineering degrees. So, this is the place to get injured playing golf!

Kind of makes you wonder....

Don't mind relative numbers. Is the absolute number of engineers declining? If it is rising, maybe the country can afford to have more people dedicated to sports.

Would you move away from the first world? It may be the type of change required to survive.

Luiz,
The most difficult thing for me about living in a self indulgent culture is trying to teach my sons to be different than the environment they go to school in every day. They need to understand the difference between a 'need' and a 'want'.
I teach them that success is getting what you want but happiness is wanting what you have. My goal is to teach them how to be happy. I hope I am successful.

I am a nurse and spent some time in New Orleans a couple of weeks after Katrina flooded it. I was in the airport turned field hospital but it felt very third world. In such a place it is much easier to appreciate what you do have. I was never so happy to have bottled water or a clean dressing in my life.

I appreciate my country but I could move out of the US without hesitation. My sons however...their father would not let them move away so easily. I will be here for a while. My youngest son will be off to college when I am just 44. Then maybe Doctors without Borders will have a place for me. Who knows?

I'm considering Nicaragua. Supposedly, all the bad stuff is over and it's a nice place with a welcoming populace and tax incentives.

Will the last American who leaves turn off the lights and bring the Flag!?

Lighten up Maugan. Don't you appreciate your own kind of humour ?


Wouter

Wouter

ACTUALLY
YOU NEED TO LIGHTEN UP SON
DON'T MAKE ME COME OVER THERE AND BREAK YOU LIKE A TWIG OK!?!?!?


STEP


OFF

GOTIT?

(and for anyone that thinks that I write in anything other than a sarcastic tone when dealing with anything other than sailing (and sometimes even when talking about sailing, especially if vvouter is involved) should know that I'm hardly ever serious about these kinds of things. I thought the donut line would have given you a clue, I guess not.)

(but I do love my little SUV)

Pete:

Costa Rica is real nice too. And great surf!!

Doug

My friends that have visited Costa Rica have also said it was very nice. My only concern would be to make sure you could pack enough ammo.