I see where you're going. What we can see plainly with our own eyes is easily refutable with scientific sounding "facts."

You might have gotten away with it if you hadn't misused the 2nd law of thermodynamics, which even a pud like me understands. Our energy policies, or non-policies as the case may be, have not resulted in energy being created or destroyed. Some of it has just been moved from a place where it an do us some good to outer space, where it can't. The sun is coming through hotter now with the reduced ozone layer, with predictable results.


>Hi,
>
>Before you starting drawing the wrong conclusions again, you need to come up to speed with the following.
>
>1. The Entropic process, with the field of observation being 1.5 x solar system width.
>2. The second law of thermodynamics.
>3. The fact that when air is heated it becomes less dense and rises.
>4. The composite of the atmosphere i.e. CO2 is only 0.04%, Nitrogen is 78%
>5. Compare the multispectrum IR aborption rates of CO2 and Nitrogen, you will be suprised.
>6. The multispectrum IR aborption rates of water.
>7. The specific heats of all of the above.
>8. The mean average sea level over the past 200 Million years. +20Metres of the present.
>9. The highest level the sea has been over the past 200 Million years.
>
>If you look at the above objectively you should see that nature's normal processes totally overwelm anything that we can do by a factor of 10,000.
>
>
>>Immediately followed by articles affirming Santa Claus? Good lord, give it up. When polar bears become an endangered species due to the MEASURED and PROGRESSIVE melting of the polar ice cap, it's time to stop denying. Climactic blip, hell. We are doing this to our own planet for no better reason than quarterly profits.
>>
>>
>>>Thanks, Kevin. A man after my own heart. I especially like any article that debunks global warming.
>>>
>>>>A new blog I came across...
>>>>
>>>>http://blog.thecrotchetyoldbastard.com/
>>>>
>>>>Kevin