Quote:
Originally Posted by jimjamuser
Actually, when you think about it, all other things being equal, high-population areas ARE definitely warmer than the corresponding low-population areas. Take Houston during the summer, it is much hotter than the cooler rural areas outside Houston. Concrete high rises surrounded by asphalt streets are a heat trap with very few trees. In the rural areas the grass, brush, and trees are pulling up water from the soil by capillary action and allowing the leaves to provide evaporative cooling.
|
Correct, a populated area should be warmer than a non-populated area. However, you are not taking into consideration the Southern location of Houston. Moscow, Russia has something like five times the population of Houston and has a very cool average temp. Is it warmer than areas outside of the city. Of course. That only proves that you feel that humans should not be allowed to populate the world. Sorry, but like I have said before we are at the top of the food chain and will continue to live here. Nature will replenish the world as we expend it's resources. You may be able to prove that we influence our immediate environment, but you cannot prove that we have any influence on Climate Change. The climate WILL change whether we wish it or not. Another poster scoffed at my tongue in cheek request that if mankind can change the climate, would they please increase the temps in the Northern states so that I can enjoy the mountains in comfort. That poster took my statement as serious.
Sorry, but no one has proven that mankind has made any changes to climate change rotation, just as we have not changed the rotation of this planet. Spend all your money on this fallacy, since you all have so much to waste but I plan to continue to live without sacrificing. I will be considerate by disposing of my litter properly, but I will also continue to use fossil fuels. After all, what reason is there to leave them in the ground and not use them as GOD intended?