Popa: Thank you for clarifying that for me.
For those following this debate, allow me to place the above comment in perspective for you. To begin our debate, I'd allowed the following two opinions to be accepted as GIVEN's:
(1) Global warming is occuring! (2) human behaviors contribute to the warming! Since the two statements were proposed as "Givens" by Popamarino, it became my privledge as the contrarian to ask the first questions, and I did so.
In reply to the agreed-upon Givens, I asked Popamarino to answer the following questions:
My Question #1
to you is: Please define the precise temperature conditions that must be reached in each of the major, human-inhabited areas of the globe such that the continued existence of humanity in each area is threatened by the warming. In other words, what exactly constitutes a "safe" and an "unsafe' temperature environment in each area?
My Question #2 to you is: Please list each human behavior that you or other "scientists" say contributes to global warming, and provide the temperature effect that each one has on the whole global temperature, as well as upon each major, human-inhabited area you identified in your answer to #1.
His response to my opening questions was,
"Sorry sir. Just don't have time to dig up specifics. I will sick to stats. you want specs you do the research." Before anyone here criticizes Popamarino for passing-the-buck on his debating responsibilities, please cut him a "break" on this one? I'll be pleased to answer my own questions for him.... just this once.
Answer to My Question #1: There is NO scientific data nor statistics that define what is a "safe" or an "unsafe' temperature environment for human habitation. In short, the information does not exist!
Answer to My Question #2:
There is NO comprehensive list of the specific human behaviors that contribute to global warming, nor is there a comprehensive list of non-human contributors! Ergo, there is NO scientific data nor statistics on what the effect of ANY variable is on global warming as a whole!
Normally in debate, Popamarino would now have the opportunity to ask
me questions. However, since I answered my first two questions
for him, it falls to me again to ask the follow-up questions.
My Question #3:
GIVEN that science has not defined the point at which humanity is safe from the "doom" of global warming, nor has science established the point at which humanity is "doomed" by the warming, how can a "Target" for reduction in global warming be established?
My Question #4:GIVEN that a comprehensive list of human and non-human "contributors" to global warming does not exist, AND that no data nor statistics exist that quantify the individual and inter-relationary effects of variables, what specific steps can humanity take to achieve an UNKNOWN "Target" that's effected by UNKNOWN variables?
Feel free to take your time answering. I realize it's hard to respond questions for which there
are no responsive answers.