Muscatine

I see you couldnt provide a solution to the problem mallory.......

Hi

I'm a sucker for "American Idol" and supper was ready for serving, so I missed something here. I cannot, from that question see the specific point Daryl was hinting at, but suspect that since we cannot faithfully know anything about the weather some 900 years ago, any fluctuations we record today don't prove a thing, outside of human kinds existence and since the weather hadn't wiped us out then, it's likely not going to now? And it doesn't matter what the weather was back then and some 1000 years from now, it shouldn't be much different. Not taking into account how dramatically man kind has changed the landscape and core supply of natural resources. Plus Daryl seems a sharp prankster with a knack for pulling the rug out from beneath someone to beat these flames by anyone who lights even a tiny fire. So....in playing devil's advocate here, I think I see his point. But we stand at a stalemate because it still doesn't prove squat. The future is our focus and what might be at stake. As I agree it's possible that the global warming theories could just be hype, it's equally as possible that it isn't. But tonight prayers go out to all those devastated people of Haiti. I think the Red Cross is the best way to reach out to them at this point. We just watched a news break showing all the devastation and it just wrenches the heart. Those poor people, add them to our prayers.   

Hi

The year was 1AD. The child was wrapped in swaddling clothes lying in a manger. Herod had sent three magi to search for the foretold savior, under the guise of recognizing the newborn king. Just as it was then, some 2000 years ago, the earth welcomed our Lord with the weather it does every newborn of today. If it isn't clear to people by now that the planet was able to sustain even our Lord back then as it does today, then it never will be. Daryl..........again, we see that it seems pointless at least for our generation to worry so much about this possible change. I at least.... concede your point. But again I implore.....why does it seem so wrong to want to affect change in the way human kind is burning through what the earth gives us? That argument is what this is truly all about. The future of what's left and in the process, based on the science, perhaps......reduce change that might......be happening.

 The comment about the coal burning you made? Corn? etc. I didn't understand that. Corn is highly renewable, it gives off a miniscule measure of carbon dioxide along with more H-2-O per BTU than oil, wood, or coal and the ash is returned to the soil as nutrient. Yes, the mini isn't a tank and we do wrap ourselves when it's as cold as it's been lately here.(being that it's January in the midwest). But we also are affected by the economic plunge too. So, noble a cause as conservation is, we find we cannot afford to keep toasty warm either. Back home as a kid we didn't even have actual heat into our upper rooms. we had open round or oval iron grates in the floor. Our rooms were freaking cold especially at night and dad always had the steam up. They replaced that old boiler heat about twenty years ago, but jeez we knew what it was like to wrap up then. It doesn't bother me.

Well it's about bedtime and tomorrow will be around quickly.

Lucy.

I see we have another by-golly write to the end of the earth poster here! This is just a simple message board. Many do not have the time or the inclination to read what is posted at such great length. We all appreciate your input. It is just too hard and time consuming to read with all our busy schedules. The point gets lost in all the fluff. And; I thank you.