Re: [OT] Is it cold or hot? global warming data

Michael Madigan wrote:

> You do understand cause and effect, don't you? When

> graphs show that CO2 goes up AFTER temperature goes up

> but the global warming weenies say CO2 CAUSES global

> warming, then one must conclude that these people are

> idiots or liars. I wonder which it is?

I wonder how many science grants, or even science degrees, or just how

many proper investigations have YOU run, in order to call these

SCIENTISTS liars. Or are you just shooting your big mouth (and small

balls) as usual?

> --- Ed Leafe <ed@leafe.com> wrote:

>> On Dec 12, 2007, at 4:57 PM, John Weller wrote:

>>> I'm not anti global warming theories, just

>> sceptical which is the

>>> result of

>>> my training in flight trials - don't believe any

>> claims

>>> (particularly from a

>>> manufacturer) until they have been proven!

>> You seem to impugn a whole lot of people who have

>> done some serious

>> research, yet you fail to mention how the evidence

>> they have produced

>> is at all questionable.

>> People get research grants because their work is

>> thorough and

>> correct, not because it supports any personal

>> theory. If anything,

>> the Big Money would be behind the folks trying to

>> pooh-pooh the

>> evidence, because that would help ensure that they

>> can continue to do

>> business without being held responsible for their

>> effect on others.

>> Also, "proof" is a slippery word. You do know that

>> any connection

>> between smoking tobacco and lung cancer, heart

>> disease, and all the

>> other bad things currently attributed to smoking has

>> never been

>> "proven", right? You do know that atomic theory has

>> never been

>> "proven" either, despite the indisputable evidence

>> of nuclear bombs?

>> -- Ed Leafe