brent wrote:
> On Dec 1, 2:40 pm, spop...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
>> Rune Allnor <all...@tele.ntnu.no> wrote:
>>
>>> On 1 Des, 19:21, spop...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
>>>> Don't buy it! Don't let them control the debate.
>>> Keep the politics out of this.
>> Um, sorry, posting links to Wall Street Journal articles is
>> injecting politics into. Don't blame me.
>>
>>> In plain English: The climate models aren't good enough.
>> "Aren't good enough" for what purpose? What standard of
>> proof is needed to make a political decision to implement
>> more pollution controls?
>
> The whole point of the global warming debate is whether CO2 is
> pollution. Why not use the word "CO2" instead of pollution. I, for
> one, do not view CO2 as pollution.
> The CO2 controls (which you seem to think is clever to call pollution
> controls) that seem to be desired by the GW folks, are really economic
> controls and individual liberty controls.

Rules against pissing in our well also limit our liberty. Are they a bad
thing?

>> Ultimately this is a political
>> decision, isn't it?
>>
>>> The argument has nothing to do with politics.
>> Sure it does.
>>
>> Steve

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯