🚀 go-pugleaf

>Daniel J. Lavigne <taxfree@planeteer.com> wrote:
>
>> Those who practised daily thought prior to the 80�s recognised
>> that human activity had caused a perceptible planetary increase
>> in mean temperatures.
>
>Prior to the 80's, eh?  Remember the great global cooling scare of the
>1970s?
Not in the 1970's--but today as well.  Sulfur pollution is a reality, on
a
local level.
>
>"The continued rapid cooling of the earth since World War II is also in
>accord with the increase global air pollution associated with
>industrialization, mechanization, urbanization, and an exploding
>population...."
>   - Bryson, Reid, in "Global Ecology", Paul Ehrlich and John Holdren, ed.
>1971

kelly.cowan@ebbs.cts.com added:

Are you talking about sulfer haze?

What continued cooling?  There is warming, and 
cooling in some local areas.

That is due to sulfur haze created by regional 
pollution.  It creates a temporary cooling that 
can last for a few years.  

Many global warming critics say they think 
sulfur haze is the solution to global warming, 
but fail to take into account the fact that the 
cooling is generally temporary and regional.  

What they do cite is the eruption of Mt. Pinatubu 
as evidence that sulfur can reduce global warming.  
Sure, if you have a volcano every 5 years.  But 
their goal is to prevent regulation of human sulfur emissions, which
only have a cooling effect locally,
and bring about other problems, such as acid deposition.

Greenhouse gases remain in the atmosphere for 
hundreds of years, and HUMAN produced sulfer 
emissions remain in the atmosphere for days or
weeks. 

Greenhouse gases warm the planet 24 hours a day, 
and sulfer haze cools just during the daytime.

Sulfur does decrease the amount of sunlight that 
reaches the planet, bringing it a period of global 
cooling IF say, a huge volcano erupts.  

But human-caused sulfur pollution is local.  You 
must understand both in order to make an informed 
judgement instead of calling global warming and 
global cooling bogus.

But I suppose cooking the facts does suit big 
business, who does not feel compelled to regulate
the effects of their activities so generations who
come after us will not have to deal with irreparable 
damage to the atmosphere.  

They do, however, feel compelled to delay solutions 
by buying off stupid (or corrupt) politicians in 
order to avoid controlling their pollution.

Ignorance will not make the problems go away, and 
denial will not excuse people from the responsibility 
of the immense damage they are doing.

Kelly.cowan@ebbs.cts.com

taxfree@planeteer.com (Daniel J. Lavigne) adds:

Thank you for your input Kelly, and my apologys 
for not replying in prompter fashion.

The question is difficult and first a glance 
approach should have us, at the very least,
considering the short and long term effects of 
that which we do to each other and the planet.

"Think global act local" and all those other 
cute slogans prodding us away from immediate 
self-interest and pointing to our long term
survival as sentients have had a beneficial
effect; and for that I thank all individuals 
and groups who have maintained their drive 
and focus in spite of a spreading insanity 
of greed that has the majority choosing shiny 
paint before life's basic needs.

To a safer, saner world. To the recognition of duty.

Daniel J. Lavigne
Founder, Co-ordinator
International Humanity House
-- 
LIFE�S DUSTY PASSING

Prophetic. Ghost grey,
Industrial pall. Suspended,
Screening our greed, Hiding our gall.
Deflecting our view of a dust laden extinction.
Answering our follies, our demands of MORE!!

Copyright. D.J.L. "Meanderings"  Spring/85