Gas Prices -- Help at last?

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Newps wrote:

Man couldn't affect the temp of the
globe one way or the other if he set out to do it.

of course global temps can be affected. Pop off a few nukes
and wait.

Like the above ground nuke testing done in the 50's and still done
occasionally today?

In article ,
"Matt Barrow" wrote:

Man couldn't affect the temp of the
globe one way or the other if he set out to do it.

of course global temps can be affected. Pop off a few nukes
and wait.

Like the above ground nuke testing done in the 50's and still done
occasionally today?

(my response is more general in nature and not specific to Matt Barrow)

sigh

ok, I shouldn't said "a few nukes." I should have said: pop off a few
thousand nukes with the intent to put billions on tons of dust into
the air. Anyone want to claim that this wouldn't affect global temps?

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

Bob Noel wrote:

In article ,
"Matt Barrow" wrote:


Man couldn't affect the temp of the
globe one way or the other if he set out to do it.

of course global temps can be affected. Pop off a few nukes
and wait.

Like the above ground nuke testing done in the 50's and still done
occasionally today?


(my response is more general in nature and not specific to Matt Barrow)

sigh

ok, I shouldn't said "a few nukes." I should have said: pop off a few
thousand nukes with the intent to put billions on tons of dust into
the air. Anyone want to claim that this wouldn't affect global temps?

I can't claim one way or the other as I don't know if a few thousand
nukes would really put billions of tons of dust in the air. I doubt it.
And I don't know how many tons a large volcano launches, but I doubt
it is billions either. I do doubt that we have enough nukes to launch
enough dust to dramatically alter the global temps, but I don't have
even close to enough data to claim that as fact.

Matt

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Matt Barrow" wrote:

Man couldn't affect the temp of the
globe one way or the other if he set out to do it.

of course global temps can be affected. Pop off a few nukes
and wait.

Like the above ground nuke testing done in the 50's and still done
occasionally today?

(my response is more general in nature and not specific to Matt Barrow)

sigh

ok, I shouldn't said "a few nukes." I should have said: pop off a few
thousand nukes with the intent to put billions on tons of dust into
the air. Anyone want to claim that this wouldn't affect global temps?

As someone else pointed out, above ground testing my all the nations was
well into the thousands of detonations. More than "a few" and just about the
"few thousands".

Pinatubo in the early 90's actually lowered the world temp a couple degrees
for about two years IIRC.

On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 06:58:44 -0400, Bob Noel wrote:

sigh

very true.

ok, I shouldn't said "a few nukes." I should have said: pop off a few
thousand nukes with the intent to put billions on tons of dust into
the air. Anyone want to claim that this wouldn't affect global temps?

even the stop of commercial airline service after 9/11 had an impact on
global warming. only for a short period, but the effect was visible, IIRC
(according to a BBC report) this was the single worst effect in the last
couple of decades. Yes, NOT flying brought the effect.

#m

--
Repeat an assertion four times and it becomes a fact. Repeat an assertion
four times and it becomes a fact. Repeat an assertion four times and it
becomes a fact. Repeat an assertion four times and it becomes a fact.