May 23, 2009 -- 11:20AM, aarroottoonn wrote:

May 23, 2009 -- 11:18AM, Ebon wrote:

I don't even need to be able to see aarr's post (I have him on ignore) to know what he said. It can hardly be a coincidence that GW-deniers are universally on the hard-right. What I have yet to understand is why they're opposed to the cleaner air and water that would be a side-effect of lowering our carbon emissions.

No one on earth is opposed to clean air and water. If you wish to live as if it were 1800 again, be my guest, just don't drag the rest of us down with you. Especially for something so obviously foolish as man made global warming.

if you lived in a big city like London in 1800 the air was actually worse

May 23, 2009 -- 11:20AM, aarroottoonn wrote:

May 23, 2009 -- 11:18AM, Ebon wrote:

I don't even need to be able to see aarr's post (I have him on ignore) to know what he said. It can hardly be a coincidence that GW-deniers are universally on the hard-right. What I have yet to understand is why they're opposed to the cleaner air and water that would be a side-effect of lowering our carbon emissions.

No one on earth is opposed to clean air and water. If you wish to live as if it were 1800 again, be my guest, just don't drag the rest of us down with you. Especially for something so obviously foolish as man made global warming.

You know, I am opposed to people being electrocuted.  But, we certainly do not have to live in a pre-electrical world in order to not have electrocutions.

We can live in world with clean air, clean water, as well as clean landscapes and roadways with out life being pre 1800's.   You do realize that in the 1800's and before that major cities had air so foul from coal and wood fires along with the stench of garbage that they were hell holes don't you.

To suggest that we must return to some earlier time in order to live responsibilbly and cleanly is just silly.

THREE senior Japanese scientists separately engaged in climate-change research have strongly questioned the validity of the man-made global-warming model that underpins the drive by the UN and most developed-nation governments to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

"I believe the anthropogenic (man-made) effect for climate change is still only one of the hypotheses to explain the variability of climate," Kanya Kusano told The Weekend Australian.

It could take 10 to 20 years more research to prove or disprove the theory of anthropogenic climate change, said Dr Kusano, a research group leader with the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science's Earth Simulator project.

"Before anyone noticed, this hypothesis has been substituted for truth," writes Shunichi Akasofu, founding director of the University of Alaska's International Arctic Research Centre.

www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25...

Of course the article in the OP quoted no dissenters to its findings.

May 23, 2009 -- 11:40AM, TENAC wrote:

THREE senior Japanese scientists separately engaged in climate-change research have strongly questioned the validity of the man-made global-warming model that underpins the drive by the UN and most developed-nation governments to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

"I believe the anthropogenic (man-made) effect for climate change is still only one of the hypotheses to explain the variability of climate," Kanya Kusano told The Weekend Australian.

It could take 10 to 20 years more research to prove or disprove the theory of anthropogenic climate change, said Dr Kusano, a research group leader with the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science's Earth Simulator project.

"Before anyone noticed, this hypothesis has been substituted for truth," writes Shunichi Akasofu, founding director of the University of Alaska's International Arctic Research Centre.

www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25...

Of course the article in the OP quoted no dissenters to its findings.

The problem is that the bolded statement mentions 10-20 to prove or disprove the hypothesis. If the hypothesis is correct (as the vast majority of climate scientists believe it is), then we don't have that kind of time left. Also, reducing emissions has the inevitible knock-on effect of improving the air we breathe and water we drink.

May 23, 2009 -- 11:47AM, TENAC wrote:

Your vast majority is overstated.

Please don't tell me you're going to mention those X number of people who say they're scientists who that website claims deny global warming...