Doug Kanter wrote:
"Black Dog" wrote in message
news
basskisser wrote:

Black Dog wrote:


I have seen almost NO science about climate change. Even in journals
like Nature, climatology has become polluted by politics.


Perhaps you should read some!


I get Nature's email alerts and abstracts. I would love to "read some"
science - if it was there. Like I said - I see no science, just politics.


I take it you've read everything ever published on the subject. Right?


Sure, I'm doing my PhD on climate change. No, of course I haven't. But
what I have read (and I am a geologist by training, so I have read a few
excruciatingly boring journals on earth-science type topics) contains
mostly bad science and much more bad politics.

Even our little discussions here are usually a re-hash of the same old
**** and of course, the requisite name-calling and lining up with the
"right" or the "left" camps. That would be fine - if it was only here -
but I see it over and over again happening in the real world. You have
no idea how much I hate lining up in the "right" camp on any issue and
it is frankly embarrassing for me to agree with GWB in any way. But
he's right about Kyoto - a failed wealth re-distribution plan which has
had absolutely NO effect. Every single country that signed onto it has
increased their emissions. But here I am talking politics, when the
subject was climate . . .