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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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

So you don't believe in plate techtonics either, eh? 'Cause that's
never been repeated in a laboratory. You have a funny narrow idea of
what constitutes science.

//Walt