Gavin Staples wrote:

"Jim Webster" wrote in message
...

"Col" wrote in message
...

"Alan Gardiner" wrote in message
...

Whilst there probably are people in global warming denial, there are
others
who are perfectly willing to accept that global warming is happening, but
doubt just how much impact humanity is having on the process.

I go along with the idea that warming is taking place but I am sceptical
with regard to the assertions that humans are entirely responsible.

But humans are not *entirely* responsible. About half of the global
warming experienced over the past 120 years can be explained by changes
in the effective solar constant. The remainder *CANNOT*. Even GW sceptic
scientists concede this much. The worrying thing is that most of the
anthropogenic component is clustered in the last few decades of the
twentieth century and it is continuing to accelerate.

warming period at the moment is just part of natures processes just like the
one in the early middle ages which allowed grapes to be grown in Scotland.
There was a huge fig orchard in Canterbury which had an abundance of figs on
it.

There are viable fig trees even today in Sheffield and at least as far
north as Ripon. They only need warmth for the seeds to germinate and
once established they crop pretty well most summers even in Yorkshire.

Incidentally where exactly were these vineyards in Scotland? It has the
smell of an urban legend - it is just far too wet in winter up there and
nothing remotely like a suitable continental climate.

We have had much warmer periods than the present in the past 1,000 years
let alone 2,000 and there was little if any man made activities around then.

The sun is a variable star. The Earth's orbital elements evolve with
time as determined by astronomy and correlated with climate by
Milankovich (sp). But you cannot invoke natural variation to explain
everything - the solar constant is measured directly by too many
independent satellites now (and for the past few decades).

Let it not be forgotten that the stone age did not end due to a shortage
of stones. The oil age will not end due to a shortage of oil either.

I suspect it will. The wood age on some Pacific islands ended extremely
miserably for the inhabitants when they ran out of trees. Overfishing is
another example where lifestyles are crucified by failure to understand
finite resources.

I reckon the moment that House of Saud falls and dirt cheap oil is a
thing of the past the world will plummet into a deep deep recession. On
the positive side it will slow down fossil fuel usage

Regards,
Martin Brown