Jeb,
You wrote: "You should at least acknowledge that I am defending the
opinions of
experts. Educated people may disagree with experts but it goes to far to
say this is "indefensible." You, for some reason, imagine you know better
than these experts. Given the complexity of modern society and the advanced
nature of our science, I think your claim is more extreme than mine.
Perhaps you are suggesting that these climate researchers are fakes
engaged in a massive conspiracy. That seems far-fetched, to say the least."
As far as global warming goes, yes, I think I know more than the
"consensus" I see reported in the media. Possibly I have been following
it more closely than you.
You don't have to have a PhD in climate science to do the math and the
climate scientists have got it wrong in some cases. They don't have
PhDs in related subjects either - the degree didn't even exist when they
were at school. It would be helpful if more of them were qualified in
statistics too. I think the basic problem has been laid out well by
Prof. Akasofu in the following link. Note Fig 2b.
http://people.iarc.uaf.edu/~sakasofu/pdf/two_natural_components_recent_climate_change.pdf
The real bottom line is that new clean sources of energy WILL make the
problem go away. I am optimistic about LENR for one.
The real damage of the consensus is the thousands of billions of dollars
being wasted by various governments on AGW and the MILLION deaths per
year in the poor countries, caused by the green polices preventing the
banks from providing loans for coal fired plants so they could have
electricity.
No. I am not confused about CO2. I am well aware what causes smog.
