I've kept out of the current discussion on climate change mostly because I have long ago learned that "a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still". Too often I see this important discussion boil down to science vs. personal belief (which is often tangled up with conservative political leanings). I've also long ago learned that "you can have anything in this world for money", including it seems the opinions and "facts" from various otherwise credible scientists, assuming you put enough moolah in their pockets. Of course the counter to this is that the majority of climate scientists have somehow managed to get on the payroll of Al Gore! LOL. But the fact that Al is the target of much if not most of the nay-saying only proves my point that the nay-saying is more about politics than anything else. Kinda sad actually. And ironic. An "Inconvenient Truth" indeed! But regardless, I like to fall back to the Carl Sagan / Star Trek analogy. We are on a tiny, fragile spaceship, hurtling through the cold, airless, inhospitable vacuum of space. Why oh why therefore would any rational being want to go and gamble with tampering with the life support system? My $02. --- On Fri, 3/6/09, stormcrow60@xmission.com <stormcrow60@xmission.com> wrote: 3. Many of the usual daily posters stopped posting...
including the moderators. I did not know if they was dissatisfied with the discussion.