JUST TO STATE MY OWN POSITION

[marchesarosa]

I do believe the climate is changing, (marginally). It always does, imperceptibly on the human timescale of three score years and ten. We are probably approaching to the end of the latest in a long series of brief interglacials which punctuate the normal (several million years or so) extensive glaciation of both hemispheres.

I do believe the global temperature may be warming ever so slightly and that a tiny fraction of that rise is due to anthropogenic CO2 from fossil fuels. I accept the physical laboratory properties of CO2 as a greenhouse gas. I do not know, and neither does anyone else, how this translates to its role in the REAL complexity of the climate "system" in the context of convection and conduction and radiation systems

I do not believe that atmospheric CO2, from whatever source, whether amplified by water vapour or not, can cause runaway catastrophic climate change and instability.

I think a bit of warming presents no problem to the world; when it warms crops grow bigger and better and deserts are greened by extra rainfall. CO2 fertilizes plants.

I do not believe sea levels have recently or will rise more than the modest trend we have experienced over thousands of years. That adds up, of course, but mankind has always adapted to it and will continue to do so.

I believe regional climate conditions are affected by urban heat island effect and land use/land cover changes like agriculture and deforestation plus airborn pollution and soot deposition which affect carbon sinks, rainfall and albedol. These are indeed anthropogenic, but not in the commonly used sense of the word which is interpreted as applying to CO2 alone.

I do believe pollution should be tackled at source by legislation nation by nation not by taxes. CO2 is not pollution, however, it is a clear, clean trace gas which we all exhale and plants need to photosynthesise.

I do believe economical renewable sources of energy should be developed for reasons of national and international energy security.

I do not object to nuclear energy generation, although I used to. Circumstances alter cases.

I would like to see Britain's mines re-opened (we have many years supply of coal underground) and a new generation of clean coal-fired power stations built.

I want to see people raised from poverty and able to enjoy the life chances we enjoy in the West.

I believe world population is too high and "unsustainable".

I remain unconvinced that the paradigm of "natural" variability in the climate system has been overturned.

I am a humanist, an atheist and a rationalist. I believe the world CAN be made a better place for ALL but I remain flummoxed as to precisely how.

I believe the ideology of "climatechangeism" is a distraction from tackling solvable problems.

[arealfarmer]

Hooray MR . A manifesto that few could disagree with !

[pippop]

Dec 5, 2009 10:55:47 GMT marchesarosa said:

I do believe the climate is changing, (marginally). It always does, imperceptibly on the human timescale of three score years and ten. We are probably approaching to the end of the latest in a long series of brief interglacials which punctuate the normal (several million years or so) extensive glaciation of both hemispheres.

I do believe the global temperature may be warming ever so slightly and that a tiny fraction of that rise is due to anthropogenic CO2 from fossil fuels. I accept the physical laboratory properties of CO2 as a greenhouse gas. I do not know, and neither does anyone else, how this translates to its role in the REAL complexity of the climate "system" in the context of convection and conduction and radiation systems

I do not believe that atmospheric CO2, from whatever source, whether amplified by water vapour or not, can cause runaway catastrophic climate change and instability.

I think a bit of warming presents no problem to the world; when it warms crops grow bigger and better and deserts are greened by extra rainfall. CO2 fertilizes plants.

I do not believe sea levels have recently or will rise more than the modest trend we have experienced over thousands of years. That adds up, of course, but mankind has always adapted to it and will continue to do so.

I believe regional climate conditions are affected by urban heat island effect and land use/land cover changes like agriculture and deforestation plus airborn pollution and soot deposition which affect carbon sinks, rainfall and albedol. These are indeed anthropogenic, but not in the commonly used sense of the word which is interpreted as applying to CO2 alone.

I do believe pollution should be tackled at source by legislation nation by nation not by taxes. CO2 is not pollution, however, it is a clear, clean trace gas which we all exhale and plants need to photosynthesise.

I do believe economical renewable sources of energy should be developed for reasons of national and international energy security.

I do not object to nuclear energy generation, although I used to. Circumstances alter cases.

I would like to see Britain's mines re-opened (we have many years supply of coal underground) and a new generation of clean coal-fired power stations built.

I want to see people raised from poverty and able to enjoy the life chances we enjoy in the West.

I believe world population is too high and "unsustainable".

I remain unconvinced that the paradigm of "natural" variability in the climate system has been overturned.

I am a humanist, an atheist and a rationalist. I believe the world CAN be made a better place for ALL but I remain flummoxed as to precisely how.

I believe the ideology of "climatechangeism" is a distraction from tackling solvable problems.

May I ask you what changed from Dec to Sept?

[marchesarosa]

It would probably have been something trivial like punctuation, stress, a parenthesis or correction of a spelling error. Nothing substantial. At the very most something could have been added that I had not included in the original list. It might have been the reference to nuclear.

I stand by it anyway.

What's to disagree with?