Re: [asa] $4 gas is here to stay

On 6/6/08, Glenn Morton <glennmorton@entouch.net> wrote:
>
Can't post pictures."

FWIW, I've seen a number of posts come through recently with pictures.
So there must be a way to do it.

"I'm going to unsubscribe"

I hope not. Your inputs are always welcomed. At least by me.

(Comment to other list members. Glenn and I go back many years. We are
close friends, even if he is somewhere to the right of Atilla the Hun
and I am even farther to the left. <grin>)

His comments on oil supply have been amazing on target over the years.
You may not like what he writes. But his credibility is high. At least
with me.

Glenn and I also disagree on GW; I was surprised to learn that from
his last post here:

These are the GW arguments I accept:

1. GW is a real phenomenon
2. GW is not a "good thing."
3. GW has several causes; a major one is CO2 emission from humans.
There is also a methane component, but it is small in comparison.

These are the GW arguments I am agnostic about:

4. We can, as a civilization, substantially mitigate GW and avoid "bad things."
5. We WILL do the above.

My reasons for accepting what I do accept is that I see the IPCC
report as a scientific consensus by the experts who should know. I
have read that in the past 5 years that the number of scientific peer
reviewed papers challenging the IPCC findings is -- zero.

Not being a climate scientist, I have a bias towards accepting their report.

I also noted that Gore's book AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH has been
scientifically vetted and judged to be 98% accurate. The biggest point
Gore makes, of couses, is that this ought not be a political issue. We
are all in this together.

Burgy

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Jun 8 14:41:37 2008