It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I think that scientists should get into gear and invent man-made photosynthesis. If plants are smart enough to do it, why aren't we? Photosynthesis would take CO2 and turn it into oxygen and energy. Job done, global warming solved...
It is safe to say that all sides of the argument are honestly concerned about the planet we are ruining. According to the potassium argon record, we are about to enter another protracted period of galciation. Dana Rohrabacher, a good friend of mine, has a saying, "Its not global warming that is our biggest problem, its global pollution." I tend to agree. I also agree and have been following the solar changes that support the premise of the book 'the chilling stars' that we are actually experienceing a solar variation, increased radience due to activity deep in our stars fusion process as it exhausts fuel and readjusts its relative equilibrium.
I also have a saying, "go outside and enjoy your day, stop focusing on negativity and do something positive instead."
augustus dunning, tehachapi, california
ALL climate models which predict "global warming" IGNORE water vapor, which is responsible for 95% of the "greenhouse effect". This means that TOTAL manmade CO2 contributions to the atmosphere amount to less than one-third of one percent of the greenhouse phenomenon. Eliminating ALL of this (an impossibility) would cost untold amounts of money and have ZERO measurable impact on the "problem", which is no problem at all, in reality. These so-called "weather experts" can't even tell us what the weather will be tomorrow, and we're supposed to fork over billions so that they can set up another world-wide bureaucracy? I don't think so.
Bob Hamrick, Palm Coast, Florida, USA