> RoMunn wrote: > What, are you standing in for Gruss or something? No one said we should toss > out all other research on the subject. What I have specifically said is that > our ability to influence the planetary climate is minimal compared to the > forces of nature that have been at work on the planet since its inception > billions of years ago. Anyone who says different is peddling something. >
Oh heck. I'll jump in: The beauty of your logic on this issue is in the recursion. Here's what it is: "We DON'T know anything, therefore we KNOW that X is true." See how goofy that sounds? You can simultaneous say we know nothing therefore we know our influence is less than blah blah blah. No logic in that. Either we know or we don't. If we don't know, then your conclusion is just as false. Further, let me give you an example of how you'd STILL be wrong even if you're supposition was right: Let's say you get hit by a Mac truck going 50mph. You'll die. Let's say I punch you in the face as hard as I can. You'll die. Now granted a Mac truck will hit you with more force than I will, but you die either way. So your logic is both recursive AND wrong even if we accept your recursion. You're a mess on this dude. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:300054 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
