And you should remember, Chuck, that I’m not arguing on the basis of climate
change, man-made or not. I am saying that we need to reduce our dependence on
a dwindling supply of fuel, fossil fuel. I don’t want the countryside in the
UK wrecked by frac(k)ing , nor the ice caps desecrated by an increasingly
desperate search for oil or gas.
There must be a better way, and we have to start by using less energy; oh, OK,
not quite as much tomorrow and the next day :-)
Chris
On 24 Mar 2014, at 16:08, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> But you know I don't agree with that and here's the reason why. Despite
> the claims that "the science is settled" and that "97% of climate
> scientists agree" neither the "science" nor the computer models based on
> the "science" have been able to make an accurate climate projection that
> covers the warming hiatus evident in the temperature observations since
> about 1998.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|