This could get very bad.

[T_Bone]

I think everyone should ignore any and all theories untill such a time as a model can be constructed that can actually be proven to be consistant with the way our planet actually works.

All these silly theories remind me of "here be dragons" labels on old maps, and we're being asked to cripple the economy planetwide in an attempt to "not fall off the sides of our flat planet."

[T_Bone]

mdma wrote:

Methane hydrates melting and causing runaway warming is not particularly theoritical. Geologists already believe it partly responsible for the Permian extinction, which killed approximately 90% of life on Earth.

Wasn't that God's great flood? ;-)

...and why didn't Noah just swat those two %$#%ing mosquitoes?

[T_Bone]

KennyR wrote:

T_Bone wrote:
I think everyone should ignore any and all theories untill such a time as a model can be constructed that can actually be proven to be consistant with the way our planet actually works.

All these silly theories remind me of "here be dragons" labels on old maps, and we're being asked to cripple the economy planetwide in an attempt to "not fall off the sides of our flat planet."

Methane hydrates melting and causing runaway warming is not particularly theoritical. Geologists already believe it partly responsible for the Permian extinction, which killed approximately 90% of life on Earth.

That's ONE of the theories, and not even one of the most popular. It's "the earth is round, but hollow" being thrown in with the other "here be dragons" theories., yet we'll probably soon be asked to change the way we do everything based on it.

[T_Bone]

FluffyMcDeath wrote:

T_Bone wrote:
I think everyone should ignore any and all theories untill such a time as a model can be constructed that can actually be proven to be consistant with the way our planet actually works.

You were probably one of those kids who didn't have any faith in that silly "those berries could be poisoness" theory. At least, not until they were proven to be deadly to you.

You were probably one of those kids who'd trade your family cow for magic beans after hearng someone's story about a really tall beanstalk. ;-)

The berries wern't "guessed" to be poisonous based on a primitive model completely guessed at that we were guessing to be accurate, although there actually were people who believed things similar, such as mixing fibers in the old testament, or

Thing about stuff like that is that you only get to be wrong once. This is one of those things.

So is the existance of god :-P
(but that hardly makes the bible a work of science)

If there is something that looks like it could be dangerous ahead, slow down. It's the only prudent approach.

I know it's hard to drive less, have a smaller vehicle, use more efficient lighting, wear a sweater and insulate your home better. These are all terrible hardships (unlike starvation when agriculture fails, because, hey, we'll all just drive to McDonalds and eat there!!).

of course that's not the solution that's usually proposed. Usually it's "everyone" needs to cut emmissions... except these countries because they're poor, oh and these countries for other reasons... oh and... aw hell, lets just cut emmissions in America and leave it at that. :-P

[T_Bone]

Dandy wrote:

FluffyMcDeath wrote:
...
Gets to the point it's justifiable self defense to kill anyone who refuses to cut their emissions.

Hey- don't let George UU become aware of that - he might end up with suicide!
:evilgrin:

Emmissions would be cut more by killing all non Americans in self defence. Europe, asia, etc.... (shhh don't tell Bush, he'll get a wild hair up his butt about an environmental crusade!)