Too Hot for Dan

Stephen Frye safrye at CONCENTRIC.NET
Thu Jan 20 19:09:09 MST 2000

>Try reading noted ecologist Dixie Lee Ray for a different opinion.
>Also you do not need to be an expert to recognize flawed science.
>Even an 8th grader will tell you that using the most recent 100
>sample points (years) out of 600,000,000,000 total  to draw ANY
>conclusion is junk science. Particularily when some of those data
>points are discarded because they don't support the predetermined
>For example, are you aware that the majority of greenhouse gases
>blamed for this "global warming" myth came prior to 1940?

Yes, I am quite aware - but I sure do thank you for reminding me.  And so
what does it matter when they built up if they indeed built up?

>All those
>CFCs that we are paying through the nose to eliminate were not even
>produced then.

CFC's do not cause the warming effect.

>Are you also aware that there is a volcano in
>Antartica just below the ozone "hole" that blasts more CFCs and other
>"greehouse" gases into the atmosphere in one belch then all of
>mankind has put into the atmosphere in its history or ever will in
>the next 100 years?

Totally false.  CFC's do not occur naturally in nature.  They are totally
man made.  No volcano in the world belches them out.

The primary contributor to the green house effect - if it is real - is
carbon dioxide.  Stephen Hawking's claim is that there is an increasing
build up of this gas.  He has not made - to my knowledge - any claim that
the green house effect exists.  His claim is that if the carbon dioxide
build up continues at its present rate, global warming will indeed become a
reality in the future.  His further claim is that if mankind has any
control over that happening, why not use that control to good ends?

As to whether or not it is occurring now - there are as many opinions as
there are people.  A reasonable examination will show that the opinions
cross political boundaries.  I think it is always silly to accept or reject
a claim such as this based solely on political beliefs.  I would rather
listen to scientists, and they differ.  So neither side seems to know for

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list