Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 16:04:06 -0800 (PST)
From: "Nicholas C. Arguimbau" <nicka@well.com>
To: Christopher Christie <refugee@thegrid.net>
cc: PROGRESSIVE POPULATION NETWORK <ppn@csf.colorado.edu>
Subject: Re: established facts
In-Reply-To: <365BDCBB.CE17C3A@thegrid.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.981128154222.25307B-100000@well.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
I=PAT seems "uncontestable," but name me a significant "P" which has
successfully and intentionally reduced its "A" and "T," and name me a
single "P" which does not collectively believe (and rightly so) that it
is entitled to as high an "A" and "T" as the nation with the highest.

If these are values with which we are stuck on a global basis (and no one
appeared willing to move from them in the Kyoto protocols), then I=PAT is
not a true working formula.  Rather, the true working formula may be:

I is greater than or equal to P x present maximum A x T.  In other words,
P is all there may be control over.