On Thu, 31 May 2007 20:43:22 -0500, Cessna 310
wrote:

Jeff wrote:
* Cessna 310 wrote, On 5/31/2007 9:01 PM:
Goofball_star_dot_etal wrote:

Fig2.3 etc.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Pub_Ch02.pdf


Document was written before there was much study. Now it seems that
the conclusions drawn in that work are under reconsideration. This is
one of the specific documents under dispute.

Wow! Talk about your fast moving fields. That paper was only published
a week ago!

In fact, its only a portion of a report that won't be complete until
later this year. It is intended to be the up most up to date collection
of all of the latest research and is the basis for the current policy
planning. Its fascinating that your personal research is so advanced
that you've made this all obsolete.





My mistake. I read the Exec Summary, scanned through a lot of the body.
It just read like an earlier study that has been so torn apart that it
no longer has any value. I need to go through the references to see if
the results of that bogus study (or others similarly criticized works)
have been used.



Time to report back to base and get the party line, I think you mean.