[at-l] Why I'm skeptical about Global Warming(long)

[RoksnRoots at aol.com (RoksnRoots@aol.com)]

       Not really. 

       So far, of all the posters calling for empiricism I have yet to see a 
single one mention the planet's reduced biosphere from human development as an 
influential factor in the calculations. I think the flaw in the 
complacentrists' arguments is seen right there alone. They are calling for fair science the 
whole while comparing a shaved apple to a normal one.   

         I would re-check that explanation for the subsurface water flows in 
Antarctica. I don't recall that example of melting as being caused by 
geological activity. As I directly remember, the National Geographic article clearly 
stated that the subsurface flows responsible for the increased transportation 
of ice shelfs in Antarctica was caused by pooling water on the sheets' surfaces 
trickling down through fissures. I believe if you research this you'll find 
it correct.

            Lastly, I have yet to see any empiricist acknowledge the Rhode 
Island-sized ice shelf that calved last year. The article clearly said that it 
had bared an area that had been frozen over for 50,000 years...

          An ancient period with high recorded levels of CO2 could easily 
have been a time of volcanic activity where volcanic emissions caused high levels 
of CO2. This particular type of atmospheric pollution would have cooled the 
world to the point of reducing sea algae and other CO2-absorbing organisms. 
Human-caused CO2 still allows sun penetration while trapping escaping heat.