Re: [INFO] Carbon emissions bill

Author	All Replies
pandora Premium join:2001-06-01 Outland ·Comcast	reply to pleekmo Re: [INFO] Carbon emissions bill said by pleekmo : I hate to tell you this, but the logic of the situation is this: The best belief of many (most) of the world's scientists is that at current levels of increase in carbon dioxide the Earth will soon experience a runaway moist greenhouse (that is, the Earth would end up with a climate similar to Venus'), after which THERE WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WE COULD DO TO STOP IT. So the point of the matter is that we can act now to ensure by reducing our greenhouse emissions to a safe level that we do not reach this point. I repeat, after we reach the point of runaway greenhouse there will be absolutely nothing we could do about it. We can act now to make sure we never have this happen or we can do nothing and possibly extinquish most, if not all, life from Earth. Are you willing to bet that we will not reach a runaway greenhouse or are you willing to do something to make certain that it never happens? With all due respect. 1) Global warming has caused the inter-glacial period we are enjoying. Without it, there would be virtually no life in Connecticut and it would be uninhabitable. Global warming has been one of the greatest gifts humanity has received. 2) I seriously doubt there is a scientific consensus Earths climate is headed toward that of Venus. CO2 is one of the weaker global warming gases, and while increases in it may very well be human caused to a large extent the full ramifications of increased CO2 into our atmosphere are mostly the science fiction work of computer models. The models get more money if they make increasingly dire predictions. 3) Connecticut by itself cannot possibly resolve global warming. It can however, cause great harm to its citizens by acting unilaterally on this issue. 4) Per capita energy consumption in the U.S. over the past generation is down. Only via immigration is our energy consumption up. We have been unable to control immigration into the U.S. until we do so, it will be impossible to stabilize our energy consumption. 5) The taxes which will be imposed on citizens of Connecticut will be regressive, affecting those who are poorest or on fixed incomes most. The result will be catastrophic for those with the least voice in Hartford. 6) Energy rates in Connecticut are already a disaster. This proposal will only compound our energy problem, and will preclude any industry from considering our state as a place to do business if there are any alternatives. -- "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use."
pandora Premium join:2001-06-01 Outland ·Comcast	to forum · permalink · · 2008-05-08 23:19:21 ·
bennor join:2006-07-22 New Haven, CT	And while reducing our carbon footprint/greenhouse emissions is a good idea it won't do much good (gasp) if there is no one left in the state of Connecticut other than the politicians in Hartford due to the taxes and fees they assess to try and reduce greenhouse emissions. There needs to be a realistic balance that can bring business into CT (so you know those guys up in Hartford can bring tax us more so they can continue to spend more) and to satisfy the "greenies" and tree huggers in this state. Also we in the US can reduce all of our greenhouse gas emissions all we'd like but it won't do much good if other countries surpass us. Oh wait, China already has. »www.physorg.com/news127495011.html
bennor join:2006-07-22 New Haven, CT	to forum · permalink · · 2008-05-09 12:35:27 ·


Thursday, 04-Dec 15:37:52	Terms of Use \| Privacy Policy \| Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo \| feedback \| contact over 9 years online! © 1999-2008 dslreports.com. page compression OFF