home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Software Vault: The Sapphire Collection
/
Software Vault (Sapphire Collection) (Digital Impact).ISO
/
cdr16
/
dbate015.zip
/
LIBERNET.TXT
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-08-05
|
15KB
|
305 lines
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
IS THIS AN UNTAMPERED FILE?
This ASCII-file version of ShareDebate International
was packaged by Applied Foresight, Inc. (AFI
hereafter). Every AFI-packaged ASCII version of
ShareDebate International is distributed in either an
"-AV protected" ZIP file format or a SDN (Shareware
Distributors Network) protected SDN file.
"AV" is the authenticity verification feature provided
to registered PKZIP users, which Applied Foresight,
Inc., is. If you are using the MS-DOS PKUNZIP.EXE
program written by PKWARE Inc. and do not see the "-AV"
message after every file is unzipped AND receive the
message "Authentic files Verified! #JAA646 Applied
Foresight Inc." when you unzip this file then do not
trust it's integrity. If your version of PKUNZIP is not
the PKWARE-authored program (for instance, you are
running a non-MS-DOS version), then this message may
not be displayed. (Note: version 2.04g of PKZIP was
used to create this authentication message.)
SDN is the major distributor of Shareware and
Copyrighted Freeware and users who extract files from
an SDN file with the current version of the archive
utility ARJ, should see:
*** Valid ARJ-SECURITY envelope signature:
*** SDN International(sm) SDN#01 R#2417
This file is an SDN International(sm) Author-Direct
Distribution. It should be verified for the SDN
Security Seal by the FileTest utility available at The
SDN Project AuthorLine BBS 203-634-0370.
(Note: prior to about May, 1993, SDN used PAK to
archive its distributions and its authenticity message
differs from the above.)
Trust only genuine AFI-packaged archives ... anything
else may be just that: ANYTHING ELSE.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
(Miscellaneous Internet Libernet Reprints)
Editor's Introduction:
These reprints reprints are from Libernet mail-list
postings which individually appeared in one of the
daily Libernet batch mailings. When one participates
in the Libernet mail-list, a policy file is sent
stating: "ATTRIBUTION: Libernet messages are frequently
reprinted in other publications, along with an
acknowledgement of the posting party. If you do not
wish this to happen, please indicate so in your
posting. Otherwise, it is assumed that all postings to
Libernet may be reproduced provided ackowledgement of
the author is given." It is this paragraph that
"authorizes" this reprint. If the posting has a
copyright and has distribution restrictions, their
terms are retained and published below and adhered to.
If you want to subscribe to Libernet, send email to
libernet-request@dartmouth.edu and follow the
instructions you receive in reply.
Contents
The titles that follow have been created or copied by
the editor for ShareDebate International.
Global Warming: Apocalypse or Hot Air?
An Institute of Economic Affairs (UK) Press Release
Proposed Oregon Property Ownership Act
by Ed Snook (Liberty Network) and Kevin Starret
[Miscellaneous Libernet Posting Follows]
======================================================
Miscellaneous Libernet Entry-1
======================================================
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 22:11:12 GMT
From: igeldard@capital.demon.co.uk (Ian Geldard)
Subject: IEA: Global Warming
To: libernet@Dartmouth.EDU
* PRESS RELEASE *
The Institute of Economic Affairs
2 Lord North Street, London SWIP 3LB
Tel: +71 799 3745 Fax: +71 799 2137
Global Warming: Apocalypse or Hot Air?,
by Roger Bate and Julian Morris,
IEA Studies on the Environment No.1,
Institute of Economic Affairs,
ISBN: 0-255-36331-1, 56pp. #5.50 (including p&p).
Belief that urgent and drastic action is needed to
combat a tendency towards global warming is based on
contestable science and unsound economics, according to
Roger Bate and Julian Morris in a new IEA paper with a
Foreward by Wilfred Beckerman. It is unnecessary to
place swingeing taxes on fossil fuels nor is other
government action required, say Bate and Morris in the
first publication of the Institute of Economic Affairs'
Environment Unit.
Bate and Morris examine the scientific basis for the
claim that warming is occuring and find it weak. The
climatic models used are very poor at `predicting the
past' - increases in temperature have been made much
less than the models would have forecast given past
increases in carbon dioxide emissions - and they are
known to be different in many ways. Serious data
problems abound: in particular, measured temperature
increases probably exaggerate actual changes because,
as urban areas expand, more temperature sensors are in
such areas. It is unclear whether the temperature
variations on which apocalyptic predictions are based
are genuine trends or merely cycles which may have
explanations other than the effects of carbon dioxide
emissions. Bate and Morris also point out that there
could be benefits from any warming which may be
occuring:
"If warming occurs at night, in winter and at high
altitudes, as is predicted, then the effects may on
balance be beneficial." (p.27)
Standard economic analysis of global warming is also
criticised. There are well-known defects in cost-
benefit analysis, both in principle and in practice,
which make it an unsuitable tool for policy-making.
Economic models give widely different answers about the
impacts of various policies to deal with warming. `No-
regrets' policies probably *would* be regretted in
practice. As Wilfred Beckerman says in his Foreward to
the paper:
"...today's environmental crusaders ... would, if
taken seriously, impose enormous unjustified costs
on society, and probably on those sections of
society that can least bear them." (p.6)
Bate and Morris argue that the only no-regrets policy
which should be pursued is to abolish taxes and
subsidies on fossil fuels to allow energy markets to
function better than they do now.
They reject the main current policy proposals for
dealing with the global warming `problem' - in
particular, limiting fossil fuel use by carbon taxes or
other means and subsidising energy efficiency.
Furthermore, they are sceptical of the value of
subsidised research into the social and economic costs
of global warming and into more complex models of
climatic change.
Government action is, according to Bate and Morris,
likely to make matters worse rather than better.
Already public money has been used to "...support
hugely expensive public projects proposed by the Green
lobby" (p.49) and such "railroading of investment" is
likely to be counterproductive. Less than twenty years
ago, the view prevailed that global cooling would be
the major climatic issue of the future. If governments
had acted then in accordance with that view they would
have taken costly action which would have resulted in
*increased* carbon dioxide emissions.
The authors conclude:
"There is a case for government withdrawal from
actions which may be increasing GHG emissions -
such as subsidising coal - but as regards further
action we recommend governments do nothing." (p.49)
Contacts:
Roger Bate, Director, IEA Environment Unit \
Julian Morris, Fellow, IEA Environment Unit-Tel:+71 799 3745
Professor Colin Robinson, Editorial Director/
--
+-----------------------------------------------------+
| Ian Geldard | FidoNet 2:254/151 CIS 70734,426 |
| London U.K. | Internet igeldard@capital.demon.co.uk |
+-----------------------------------------------------+
======================================================
Miscellaneous Libernet Entry-2
======================================================
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 94 16:19:23 PST
From: Terry Liberty-Parker
<rutgers!p49.f91.n382.z1.fidonet.org!Terry.Liberty-
Parker@Dartmouth.EDU>
Subject: Oregon Property Ownership Act
To: libernet@Dartmouth.EDU
X-Fido-Echo: LIBERTY
To: Libernet
Date: 6 Apr 94 09:21:56
=======================================================
* Forwarded by Terry Liberty-Parker (1:382/91.49)
* Area : AEN_NEWS (AEN_NEWS)
* From : Thomas Mick, 1:105/345 (05 Apr 94 10:38)
* To : All
* Subj : Property Owners Protection and Empowerment Act
=======================================================
The following is a proposed amendment to the Oregon
Constitution filed on March 1, 1994 by Ed Snook
(Liberty Network) and Kevin Starret:
PROPERTY OWNERS PROTECTION AND EMPOWERMENT ACT
BE IT ENACTED by the People of the State of Oregon:
PARAGRAPH 1. The Constitution of the State of Oregon is
amended by creating a new Section to be added to
Article XV and to be appropriately numbered to read:
Section 1:
(A) Not withstanding the limits of Article I,
Section 18 of the Oregon Constitution, nor any existing
Oregon Statute, neither the state, nor any of its
agencies or subordinate government bodies, nor any
employees thereof shall use any federal funds, state or
local taxes, funds, monies or fees to regulate,
deprive, take or diminish any person's rights in
private property, the services of any person, or impair
the obligation of any contract, in any manner for any
public use or benefit without full market compensation.
(B) Any person or persons injured, diminished or
impaired for public benefit in a manner described in
Section 1 (A) of this Act shall be entitled to a
judgment which shall be determined by twelve circuit
court jurors, who have been fully informed, in writing
which includes all of this Act, of their constitutional
powers to weigh both law and fact in reaching an
indictment or verdict in any such case in the state.
(C) Any party injured by violations of any part
of this Act are permitted to sue for treble damages
plus all costs and attorney fees. Judgment by the jury
shall be final.
PARAGRAPH 2. The following definitions shall apply in
subsections (A), (B), and (C) of Section 1 of this Act.
(a) Federal funding means any funds from any
federal source to be used for any state or local
purpose.
(b) State, county and city funds are those that may
be derived from taxes, sale of property, monies from
fees or licenses or any other source.
(c) Lottery or gaming funds means those derived
from any state regulated lotteries or games.
(d) Private property includes all real property,
improvement, personal, professional and all other kinds
of property of whatever nature.
(e) Employees include those of the judiciary,
special taxing and service districts, agency
administrators, and appointees of state and interstate
or inter-governmental commissions or pacts.
(f) A "taking", pertaining to value or use, means
to diminish, impair, steal, blemish, damage, harm,
hurt, destroy or injure in any manner.
(g) Impair means to destroy, obliterate,
annihilate, liquidate, remove, injure or kill.
(h) Diminish means to abate, moderate, modify,
decrease, pare, qualify or contract.
(i) Full compensation means the difference in value
of the property before and after the property was
identified as public use property, plus attorney fees
or other costs incurred by the property owner to
collect the amount due.
(j) Public us or benefit means a situation wherein
the public gains an advantage, consequence,
distinction, importance, profit, reputation or repute.
PARAGRAPH 3. If any provision, clause, or section of
this measure is for any reason held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
the remaining portions or clauses and phrases shall not
be affected but shall remain in full force and effect.
-+-
Origin: *Sons of Liberty* Beaverton, Oregon (1:105/345)
### [End of Miscellaneous Libernet Postings] ###