On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 06:26:39PM +0000, jim bell wrote: > From: John Newman <j...@synfin.org> > >I disagree, vehemently. Global warming is not a red herring. > > Permafrost is melting, oceans are rising and acidifying, and the > >future for big >coastal cities is looking very bleak indeed. There > >is a scientific consensus on this issue. > > I don't see how there can be "scientific consensus" unless there are > accurate computer models which show how up climate temperature > increases as a product of addition of CO2 to the atmosphere. Both > qualitatively and quantitatively. How much do these problems > represent? > > From Lord Kelvin: > > “When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in > numbers, you know something about it, when you cannot express it in > numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind; it may > be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarely, in your thoughts > advanced to the stage of science.” > http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/166961-when-you-can-measure-what-you-are-speaking-about-and > > There is also the prospect of adding SO2 to the high atmosphere to > counteract heating, which could be a very cheap solution. > Jim Bell
THANK you!! "Global warming" gets bandied around as though it is "scientific" or even more ridiculously "accepted science". And another thing !! <waves old wooden walking sticdk> it was always called Global Warming, except then it got called Global Anthropogenic Temperature Changes, except then it got called Global Climate Change, except before in the 60s or 70s (dang, I can't remember which) it was called Global Cooling - front page Time Magazine articles an all. Take THAT yung whipperyschapperies! Dang Global Scientific Marketers just can't decide which terms to even use - that sure gave me confidence in their certinty!