Unfortunately it is too late to reverse the effects, maybe it we had listened to the earlier warning and acted sooner we could have saved lives.

Every life has a price to be saved.
Lifes will be saved at a price.
People who can pay will pay.
Now is the time to hone the technologies that might help to save life in a near future and get prepared to cash in.

There is no arguing or debating on that.

In the other post regarding global warming many people were quick to deny it as a real occurrence and thought that scientist had some secret political agenda.

The data, measurements of glacial ice receding and satellite radar images of ice disappearing in the poles are all indicators that something is happening. Yet the media and particularly our pro energy, anti-enviroment government are ignoring this and treating it as a hoax.

At what point will they recognize and admit this is a real threat even for them and how will they explain themselves for being obstructionist and a big contributor to this problem.

There are a lot of people who will not concern themselves with the environment until/unless our impact on it changes it to a degree where it affects their day to day lives. For most, I believe, financial success and security are more tangible than potential environmental damage.

On a side note, I think that a good way to identify blind partisan cheerleaders is to find regular joes who argue big business's position on the issue. No one but a big business executive, a politician in his pocket, or a big business patsy would possibly argue the merits of ignoring environmental science.

__________________
[b][SIZE=2]"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."[/b][/SIZE]

-Thomas Jefferson

The insurance industry woke up a while ago. Swiss re and Munich re (the 2 largest reinsurers in the world) recognize the existence of global warming and that that man made emissions could be a major factor. Both believe it will lead to an increase in "catasrophic" weather related events.

Entities like these, as well as NASA, cannot be written off as wacko scientists with no idea what they are talking about.

How true, I guess if you have dwelled in a city for most of your life and have never actually seen much of the environment or how crops are grown, then yes maybe it is some abstract scientific theory that has no effect on your Wall Street lively hood.

How many people in these big cities such as New York for example realize that if all shipping into the cities ceased for four days they would be facing massive starvation.

That's a cheap shot.

Your example that "if all shipping into the cities ceased for four days they would be facing massive starvation" is the kind that makes people shake their heads.

I could just as easily say that those who make a living on Wall Street would be among the first to see the effects of global warming to the extent it would contribute to a rise in sea levels. They are the kind of folks who can afford ocean front property.

You're not going to get anywhere on the issue if you start by essentially insulting the intelligence of people who live in major cities. Particularly since the major cities are where a large portion of votes for a political candidate that would be willing to take action will come from.

July 2004

City Joins Suit Against 5 Power Companies

By JULIA PRESTON and ANDREW C. REVKIN

"New York City officials, evoking an apocalyptic vision of Manhattan's tunnels flooded and Kennedy Airport under water, joined a federal suit brought yesterday by New York and seven other states against five of the country's largest power companies in an effort to curb global warming.

New York was the only city to join the suit, which was brought by states dissatisfied with the Bush administration's policies on controlling emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that has been linked to the significant warming of the earth in recent decades.

Painting a scenario that could have come from "The Day After Tomorrow," the city's top lawyer, Michael A. Cardozo, detailed the "extraordinary impact" he said global warming could one day have on New York. It could bring a sharp increases in asthma cases, he said, as well as erosion of beaches in Queens and the Bronx and flooding of Staten Island wetlands.

"And it can mean, to put this most dramatically, flooding of the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels and on the landing strips at La Guardia and Kennedy Airports," Mr. Cardozo said.

While city officials did not suggest that any of those calamities were imminent, they accepted Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's view that the scientific evidence was "rock solid" that carbon dioxide concentrations contributed to global warming."



Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg decided to participate in the suit - a clear challenge to President Bush's approach to pollution control - because he believes that the city should not delay action on the issue, Mr. Cardozo said.

Not to mention that Wall St. itself would be under water if the oceans rose 23 feet.

__________________
Hugs & Kisses, Jefe
xoxox

One can build dams. Democratic wall street has money enough to pay.