And 50,000 years before that, glaciers were at there apogee … but here’s the thing, bub. Back then, there were a million or so humans, living hunter-gather lifestyles. Ice comes, ice goes, not problem. Pick up your spear and migrate. Water covers vast areas of the coast? No problem, pick up your spear and move inland.

Today, there are 6.3 billion of us; 25% or so living in areas that will be effected by sea level rise. Can we pick up Miami,or London or most of Bangladesh etc. etc. and move? And if we are part of the force causing this, should we simply continue because it’s happened in the past? And what is the effect of anthropogenic changes if they are superimposed on a natural cycle? Something unprecedented in geologic history?

And we are reliant on a relatively brittle agricultural system dependent upon a few plant species grown in massive mono-cultures. Being brittle, and adapted for the places where soil types and climate are a certain way, can they sustain a change? Will low quality- high clay soils in the Steppes substitute for rich top soils with these grains? Want to bet the ranch on it?

So, if there were a few million of us wandering around with spears, I suppose you could call it old news. But we’re in the Holocen now, bud. The old natural cycles ploy doesn’t take you too far …

“And 50,000 years before that, glaciers were at there apogee”. You just made my point. 50,000 years ago there were no SUV’s or coal burning power plants either and the glaciers have still receded. Sorry John, if the Earth decides to go through a warming trend, there is absolutely nothing you can do about it. Even the Kyoto protocol is calculated to effect the global mean temperature (”global mean temperature” - what a bogus measurement) by 0.07C. If one includes error, that value is negligible, yet the cost to the world population is astronomic.

Oh is the the 20-plus foot rises in sea levels predicted by these pathetic models that now predict - according to the latest IPCC report - sea level rises of less then a foot over the next 100 years? Quick everyone sell your beach front property before it’s too late… In fact, I will be glad to take it off you hands for 10 cents on a dollar. Remember readers out there, some “creditable” scientists say it is already too late. 10 cents is better then nothing.

Then those in hurricane prone areas, quick sell your property. Listen to Gore and the NOAA. Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth” and the NOAA predicted a horrible 2006 hurricane season and this year was going to produce how many killer canes? I will also buy your property for 10 cents on the dollar.

Hey, if you really believe that CO2 has a serious effect on the planet, then feel free… stop eating meat… don’t fly… buy a hybrid… don’t run your electricity… by a bicycle (careful you don’t exert yourself because you will exhale more CO2 into the atmosphere)… don’t jog or other anaerobic workouts… don’t have children… purchase some green credits so you don’t feel as guilty… i really don’t care, just don’t try to force me to fund your belief in junk science. If you want to convince me and the other rapidly growing pool of scientists that man is responsible for global warming, you better come up with facts - not emotional hype and scare tactics. As I said in another blog, man-made global warming alarmists are as creditable in understanding the science of global warming as president bush is on foreign affairs. They both rely on “scare tactics” and they are complete idiots.

Finally, it’s Monday Night Football night! I wonder how much CO2 Monday Night Football is responsible for. If the alarmists are serious about reducing America’s carbon footprint, better start with the CO2 footprint of football…

Meanwhile, I will grab a bag a chips and a coke - produced by plants that emit CO2 - out of my CO2 generating refrigerator, turn on my CO2 producing TV; sit down on my couch whose production required the emission of CO2 and enjoy the game! I promise to limit my CO2 emitting outbursts when my team scores a touchdown.

What is your CO2 footprint John? What are you doing to - not reduce - but eliminate YOUR carbon footprint?