> Scott wrote: > You are wrong. I would say that b is the appropriate response, but to be > honest, it is a poor analogy. > > And if you look at the data from the ice cores,
That's the funny thing about all of the is-it-or-isn't-it, that line of reasoning totally misses the point. So drop the data crap. You're not a climate scientist and neither am I. Thus our calculus for Global Warming is like a loud noise in the night: There's a risk here and we need to expend resources to both investigate further and to implement mitigating action should our investigation turn up something dangerous. We both agree on that now and now your GW position is clear: spend money to investigate, spend money to defend. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:283473 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
