On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 01:17:15 -0500, Scott Nudds wrote:


On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:32:31 +0000, George wrote:
He also assumes that the environment in which we all live could sustain
such levels. I don't think there is any precedent for that assumption.


"Joe Jared" wrote
I don't think plants will complain.

Oh, I think the plants and 100,000 head of cattle that have just dies in
the Texas wildfires would complain.

You forgot to mention 11 humans. The plant life will naturally recover,
and the life of cattle is usually cut short anyway and seen as t-bones,
rump roasts or on special occasions, as cow tongue. Naturally, there could
also be a loose association with many of the meteorological disasters over
the past 20 years, but still it's a small price to pay compared to the
benefits. More obvious would be a temporary increase in cost of beef due
to the sheer loss. Harsher weather than we've already seen is inevitable,
but it's temporary and will settle into calmer weather once temperatures
stabilize from north to south.

--
Listed? You must be joking http://relays.osirusoft.com
Pallorium V. Jared ruling http://www.oretek.com/lawsuite/ruling.pdf
http://www.oretek.com/lawsuite/