"Walt" wrote in message
...
Gilligan wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4604332.stm

Where was the consensus?

People who rely on consensus - other people's opinions - usually cannot
think for themselves.

Oh, you're just mad because the scientific evidence isn't corrorborating
your preconceived opinions.


No. Show me one computer model that has accurately simulated the climate for
the past 200 years. Show me a computer model that predicts what the weather
will be in 30 days.

Science is about measurement, repeatability, understanding and prediction

The evidence is overwhelmingly in my favor. There are millions of years of
past climate changes. Look here at the chart of temperature vs CO2 for the
last 750,000 years:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

Are you saying man caused at the warming spikes and sudden drops in the
temperature and CO2 concentrations for the last 750,000 years? In fact,
10,000 years ago it was greater than it is today.



That's fine. You can keep holding your opinions despite overwhelming
evidence to the contrary, and trolling through the interwebs looking for
something/anything to bolster your faith-based notions. Michael Crichton,
anyone? Surely a hack Sci-Fi novelist would be in a better position to
know than an actual reasearch scientist who has to submit his assertions
to a peer review process, right?

So tell me - seriously - what exactly is my opinion?



Meanwhile, those of us with a science/engineering background can read the
peer-reviewed papers, listen to the scientists who have much more
familiarity with the subject, evaluate the evidence, and draw the
inevitable conclusions.

Inevitable conclusions - is that similar to "preconcieved notions"



Global warming is sort of like the link between cigarette smoking and
cancer - it took a decade or two to go from conjecture to hypothesis to
consensus theory. Sure, there are still those who deny the link, but
they're mostly paid shills for the tobacco companies and kooks on the
intertubes. Likewise, when the global warming studies first came out in
the early 80's any reasonable person would have been skeptical. I
certainly was. By the mid-ninties it was more than just hypothesis, and
today the evidence is basically irrefutable. Except for a few paid shills
for the energy companies, some non-scientist bloviators and a large
quantity of their ignorant followers, the verdict is in.

NOAA:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globa...paleolast.html

Here's raw data for the last 1,000 years:

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/pal...al-4_12_01.txt

Go over the Solar Beryllium 10 concentrations. You know what that indicates
or do you need it explained? What is your conclusion about the data?

Do you know what NOAA is?



So sorry that you're on the losing side, but them's the breaks. (Actually,
I wish you were right. But wishing won't make it so.)

No, I don't expect to convince you of anything, Glen. You've clearly made
up your mind. But I can point out to others that what you say is crap.

You can only prove it is crap with logic, reason and fact. When are you
going to get around to producing some of this?


Instead rely on basic physical laws and measurable, repeatable
experiments reduced to the fundamentals.

So you don't believe in plate techtonics either, eh?

So that's your use of logic?

'Cause that's never been repeated in a laboratory.

Measured by GPS and reproduced in the lab. The geological evidence is very
strong too, ridges, rifts, mountain ranges. The thin spots in the earth's
mantle below Hawaii and Yellowstone clearly show the drift. Seismic analysis
also show plates floating.


You have a funny narrow idea of
what constitutes science.


I think you do.

"This first thing a scientist does is work to disprove a new theory."

Just doing my job.

Come back when you have some numbers (measured data or a validated model )
that shows the sun is not warming (increasing its output) or the sun is not
the major cause of global warming.

Or simply show that CO2 levels are historically (show about one million
years of data) a leading indicator for temperature rise.

You can't and you won't. You will simply parrot the phrase "There's a
consensus". Famous last words of many civilizations.