From: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: Ozone problem burns Politically Correct
Organization: Small Business Systems, Incorporated, Esmond, RI  02917
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 21:53:46 GMT

session@seq.uncwil.edu (Zack "C sky is falling, C sky is falling" Sessions) 
writes:

>As Mr. Carney mentioned, fish stocks appear to be going down in the Great
>Lakes, and even though much of that is attributed to overfishing, surely
>some is a result of various industrial pollutants,

I'll agree with this, since when man interacts with nature, nature can 
hardly be expected to be static.

>including the effects
>of so-called acid rain, espcially in Lake Ontario.

Which studies show a direct correlation between the increased acidity of
Lake Ontario and the use of industrial chemicals, which could not have been
introduced into the Lake through *any other means*?

[...]

>A better question is "How many have yet to come true?".

Ohhh boy. What a convincing argument. Let's eliminate all automobiles since 
over 50,000 people in the United States alone will be killed
in automobile accidents. That will solve the problem!

>First of all, just what makes
>you think that the Northern Hemisphere has a monopoly on CFC emissions,
>eh? While most industrialized countries are in the Northern Hemisphere,
>CFCs are used all over the world. The two largest CFC contaminators are
>air conditioners and refridgeration units, used widely throughout the
>world.

1. The Northern Hemisphere has been more industrialized for a longer period
of time than the southern hemisphere has been.

2. How many people in the Southern hemisphere are "rich" enough to afford
air conditioners and refrigerators? What percentage of the population in 
the south versus the north have these modern conveniences?

>And the comments in the story are not theories, they are the results of
>numerous observations. Based on some of your previous comments though, I
>question your ability to fully comprehend the article.

Observations == theories. Gravity == fact. Observations != facts.

>The "hole" over the Antarctic was not the proof, but the reason we started
>looking in the first place, bub. And the trend of depletions is increasing
which does help to add some credibility to the theory. And just last year,
depletion has been observed over the North Pole.

me>When they attempt to apply their "knowledge" to other areas, it just doesn't
me>wash.

>Care to elaborate on that comment?

Yeah, just look at one scientist - Carl Sagan - who attempted to tell us
that the oil fires in Kuwait would cause a mini nuclear-winter.

>And as Mr. Carney suggested, if everyone listens to people like you, then
>you all should start digging shelters and stocking up on canned goods.

Yeah. Where's that red button. Heh..Heh..Heh...

>You may not need it, but your children certainly will. You see, THAT is the
>issue here. Not that the potential damage will occur in our lifetimes, but
>if we continue polluting our atmosphere, it will occur eventually, there's
>no way to avoid it.

Oh boy, yet another the-world-is-doomed prediction. Listen, since the world
is obviously doomed because of humans like us, why don't you take a gun and
end it all, and help contribute to saving the Earth?

MD
-- 
--  Michael P. Deignan                      / 
--  Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com            /   I'm not a bigot,
--    UUCP: ...!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /    I hate everyone.
-- Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              / 
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:17056 ca.politics:3334 ba.politics:2585 alt.politics.homosexuality:1773 soc.motss:19372