- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
In regards to your earlier letter to me: Two points: 1.) No one is saying that man can't impact his environment. 2.) The four quetions I asked may have nothing to do with your argument, but they are the only four questions about global warming that matter. Until they are answered, every other question it moot.
In regards to C02 -- again, the leading greenhouse gas (in fact, about 95% of greenhouse gas) is simply water vapor. All this "carbon footprint" talk is like complaining about a mouse when there is an elephant in the room.
And, as for scientists: As I said earlier, in the 1970's, "Global Cooling" was getting its share of magazine covers. At that time, the theory was that too much pollution in the air was deflecting the suns rays, so everything was cooling. If that's the case, let's just start polluting more so we can keep warming in check!
Yes, I'm being silly with that last comment. But the logic of much of the "computer modelling" upon which much of the warming alarmism is based is equally silly.
