"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m...9/ixworld.html

It appears that one of the legacies of the Clinton administration is
that global warming stopped in 1998.


Raising hand I have a question! Are you the opinion that there
could never be any information which would convince you that we *are*
contributing to global warming, and might want to change a few living
habits?

There is no information at this time that would convince me that global
warming is a man made phenomena.

You might be right, or you might be wrong. However, here's an analogy.
Your doctor says you have a brain tumor. You tell him won't believe it's
dangerous until he shows you a petri dish on his desk containing a tumor,
from your head, the size of a bran muffin. Of course, by that time, you'd
be so messed up that you won't be able to comment on what you're seeing.

No, the analogy should be; You have headaches and one doctor says you
have a brain tumor even though it doesn't show up on a CT scan, "it's too
small" says the doctor "to show up on a scan at this time but it will kill
you if left untreated". You go for a second opinion and that doctor asks
about your lifestyle, does and in-depth study and concludes that it's
probably related to your job as an amusement ride inspector but to be on
the safe side you should get a CT scan every 6 months for 2 years to be
sure. You can't quit your job ( you have a family to support) so you
follow the second doctors advice.

Doug, you call the second doctor a quack when that IS the reasonable
choice. The first doctor MAY be right but the evidence is not all in.
There may be a tumor caused by insult but it's not going to be malignant,
it's not going to grow or metastasize.


Interesting analogy, Jeff, but doctor #2 hasn't suggested any behavioral
changes. That would complete the picture.