Hi Fellows
Maybe all those concerned, and those not concerned with this issue should
spend several or more hours reading "Respect for nature: a theory of
environmental ethics" by P.W. Taylor published in the series on Studies in
Moral, Political, and Legal Philosophy published by Princeton University
Press. Once through it then ask what responsibilities confront us, global
warming
if it exists, is one of many issues.
Kind regards
Ed
www.vintage-sportscar-touring.ca
'65 BJ8 '89 Morgan 4/4
P.S. Dave the promised photocopies will be in the mail this coming Monday.
Dave & Marlene wrote:
> Alan,
>
> There are other ligitimate points of view on CO2/global warming. Here is
> one: http://www.clearlight.com/~mhieb/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
> I guess that it depends on the horse you wish to support. Not all have
> been brainwashed into the "green thing". Note particularly that water
> vapor is by far the most significant factor in the green house effect.
> Something that your sources apparently choose to leave out. In my
> opinion, you and the greens are ignoring facts that put global warming
> in proper perspective. Believe what you will. It will be argued forever.
>
> Dave Russell
>
> Blue One Hundred wrote:
>
>> Mike -
>>
>> There are two types of polution - visible (unburnt
>> hydrocarbons) and invisible (CO2 - green house
>> gasses).
>>
>> The proportion between the two varies depending on how
>> "clean" you car is, but at the end of the day the
>> total wieght of carbon your car puts in the atmosphere
>> is directly correspondent to your gas mileage.
>>
>> California laws and regulation are totally focused on
>> the "visible" pollution... but totally ignores
>> invisible pollution (CO2 - greenhouse gas). So all it
>> means are the greens are erroneously focused on
>> visible pollution... when in the long run its the
>> invisible pollution that matters.
>
>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Alan
|