[FPSPACE] 2 big arguments

[Keith Gottschalk]

    Yes to your 1st sentence below.=20

    On your 2nd sentence, rather than "balderdash",  it is more likely =
that the present level  of CO2 has both costs and benefits. More tomatoes =
and more storms. The same likely applies to both higher & lower levels of =
CO2.  At the moment, most published research tilts towards saying that =
costs outweigh the benefits for our current increase in CO2, in most =
areas.=20

     I share your implied scepticism towards apocalypse-mongers, since =
only thirty years separates predictions of accelerated ice-ages from =
predictions of global warming! But this topic would not be the first time =
that human influences can ameliorate or aggravate complex and contradictory=
 natural cycles. Living in a mostly semi-arid country, one notices these =
debates.  yours,

- Keith


> It would be a valuable contribution to the debate, if
 researchers could establish the optimum level of CO2,
 and a threshold over which more CO2 would have adverse
 effects.

> It's obviously balderdash to claim that the present level
 of CO2 is bad in any way. =97 Jens Kieffer-Olsen