Monarch Extinction press releases.

Stanley A. Gorodenski stan_gorodenski at
Thu Nov 13 18:42:26 EST 2003

Chuck Vaughn wrote:

> stated outright that it is human caused. We give ourselves so much 
> credit! The planet has been much warmer and much colder than it is 
> right now. We now find ourselves in a slight warming trend after a 
> cooling tend a few hundred years ago. So What?

Although there have been periods in geologic history where the planet 
has been colder or just as warm or warmer than now, the difference is 
that the models developed by researchers in this area cannot account for 
the current increase in temperature unless they introduce anthropogenic 
factors as the major, or only, causes. This is where simple correlations 
with the past can be misleading. It is true that their models may be off 
and there are other undiscovered influencing factors (such as the 
recent, I believe, realization of the absorption of CO2 due to the 
uplift and weathering of mountains), but I place more faith in the 
results of their research than simple correlations produced by the 
non-scientist or scientist not researching in this area. I have not yet 
seen a convincing argument (the correlations with geologic past are not 
convincing to me), with the _possible_ exception of sunspot correlations 
Paul produced some time ago (which was, apparently, successfully refuted 
a few years later) on the other side that seriously throws into doubt 
anthropogenic factors as being the major, or only, cause of the current 
global warming.

I am not preaching and I am not an authority on this subject, just 
stating things as I know them. Does anyone have convincing evidence that 
seriously throws into doubt th athropogenic hypothesis? I would like to 
know because, like most everyone else I would guess, our opinions are in 
part molded by what we believe are credible sources.


   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit: 

More information about the Leps-l mailing list