My point is, not to debate so much on the *cause* as to  do what we can 
to deal with it.  I think we need to stop all this going back and forth 
about what is causing the global warming and to stop wasting so much 
energy and seriously start conserving our resources.  It doesn't matter 
if it's from a natural cyclical changes or our fault because either way, 
our resources are finite and that's what we need to focus on.  That's 
why I like Al Gore's presentations - because he gives tips on what we as 
individuals and groups can do, not argue for hours on end on the causes.

We need to urge companies to go green and we need to urge our 
politicians to go green.  I really think we get too mired in this debate 
and forget the most important part - the activism.

Kat

Peter Hunsberger wrote:
> On 9/19/07, kat <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>   
>> For Ken:  http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0920/p14s01-sten.html
>>
>> And to weigh in on the debate, I planet myself firmly in the middle - I
>> don't think we humans are necessarily the main cause of global warming
>>     
>
> The thing that matters is that humans have tipped the global cycles
> over what is known as an inflection point.  Think of it this way: for
> millions of years the planet has been going through regular solar
> variations and adapted many ways to compensate for this.  It's like a
> well balanced teeter totter.  Sometimes a little hot, sometimes a
> little cold, but always swinging back and forth.  Then humans come
> along and start piling a huge amount of green house gases on one end
> of the teeter totter.  The teeter totter isn't going to go back into
> the normal back and forth pattern without some help on the other end
> of the teeter totter.  Humans might not be the main cause for the
> teeter totter going back and forth, but we are the main reason it's
> going to stop going back and forth unless we do something about it.
>
>   
>> (we haven't been on this planet long enough to be accurate in  our
>> records regarding cyclical data)
>>     
>
> What may seem surprising is that we can be accurate in figuring out
> the cycles of the global climate teeter totter going back tens of
> thousands of years without human recorded climate records.  Rather we
> can measure the amounts of various radioactive isotopes in various
> geological samples.  The one you hear about most often being ice cores
> from Antarctica.  The ratios of these various isotopes can tell us
> things like temperatures, green house gas concentrations and
> geological age.  Nature has been kind enough to provide us with all
> the records we need going back over 400, 000 years:
>
>  http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/vostok.html
>
> (or search on NOAA antarctic ice cores if you want to get into more
> detail, though many of the 1st links are a bit old).
>
>   
>> but I also think we certainly don't
>> help matters any in the way we are using up the planet's resources - we
>> all need to slow down and each do our part to conserve energy and think
>> about how our activities affect the physical world.  When we have
>> another Ice Age, how are we going to cope?
>>     
>
> Sooner than that: how are we going to have enough resources when 1
> billion + Chinese people start to have life styles similar to North
> Americans?
>
>   

-----------------------

To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:

http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy