From: "Geo." 

"John Beckett"  wrote in message
news:4knds297at06nd2n0khhuug94duu360pma{at}4ax.com...

> And there are probably hundreds of other cases for those who have the
> stomach to find them.

So what kind of scientists make claims based on inconclusive evidence? I
mean that's exactly what we see coming out of this bunch. Well we think
it's most probably happening and if that's true then we think it's most
probably caused by human activity although we really can't back that up
with anything considered science..

WTF?

Then as if that's not enough, the UN diplomats announce it as if it's for
sure science, read the report then read their announcements. First the
report jumps to +1 but admits that it's a guess then the politicians jump
to
+5 and forget the part about it being a best guess.

Oh, and the scientists even admitted that much of what they are saying is
based on ice core measurements yet they have still not addressed the issue
of ice cores not recording during warming periods.

Then along comes this guy who instead of looking at 100K years looks at
550,000K years and says if you tried you could not account for the kind of
temperature changes that we've seen in that time using just earth
atmosphere events. He uses something OTHER than the ice cores and comes up
with a completely different train of thought.

Sorry John, I know it's politically incorrect to not talk global warming
but it's not a scientific issue, it's a political issue. We get warm
weather and everyone is saying "see see.. it's global warming"
then 3 weeks later it's been below freezing for 2 straight weeks and we are
seeing temperatures of -10F with record heating fuel consumption over the
whole northern US and where are the "see see" guys?

Explain the ice ages and what caused them, explain the warm periods and
what caused them. No we can't do that but we know for sure that increased
co2 levels is going to cause the next one and it's all based on ice as a
recording device, something that by it's very nature is a poor recording
device when you want peak co2 levels.

Should we be worried about CO2 levels? I'm a tree hugger, co2 is good for
trees. I'm more worried about shrinking global forests than co2 levels.
That's not to say I'm not concerned about co2, but I don't believe the hype
being spewed by the likes of ADM and all the other folks who stand to make
billions on an over reaction.

Geo.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5