>5.During the latter half of this century there has been a solid
> correlation between economic growth and increased consumption of
> fossile fuels, were increase in fuel usage is tyically 1-3% greater
> that economy growth in that year.
Yet the EPA claimed no warming trend since 1979, even though that's been
a period of strong economic growth in the West. Cause and effect, and
all that.
>Currently the known supplies of oil/gas are only
> sufficient for 25-50 years (depending on your growth scenario) at
> the current consumtion level.
Oil supplies have been "sufficient for 25-50 years" for as long as
I can remember. Odds are they always will be.
>AFAIKT almost every glacier on this planet has been retreating during this
>century
AFAIK every glacier in New Zealand has been increasing in length this
century. Can't comment on anywhere else.
>The statistics are difficult, but if you superimpose temperature data
>concerning the last 150 years from Vinnikov, Groveman and sources like CRU
>and GISS the similaritiest are striking to say the least (and so is the
>upward-trend).
These wouldn't happen to all be computer models based on the same
assumptions, by any chance? Interesting that you quoted data for the
last 150 years; thereby leaving out the very warm period at the beginning
of the 19th century, where temperatures weren't much lower than today. Is
this your idea of certainty?
>X-cuse me? The relation between increased CO2 matches the start of the
>industrial revolution and the relative decreasing C14 concentration
>correlated with statistical data on global usage of fossile carbon.
I don't think anyone's questioning that we've dumped a lot of CO2 into
the atmosphere. We're questioning the doomsaying about it causing
massive global catastrophe.
>the consequences for the global food production (amongst many other things)
>could be a big problem.
You mean it will grow better with more CO2?
>Exacly, if the current trend does not change we'll have burned 300 million
>years of solar energy in about three centuries. It's been a nice kickstart
>for out technical civilisation but we have to find better alternatives
>pronto.
So you agree that we need to keep the government from restricting our
technological progress with unneccesary limits on fossil fuel use then?
Mark