I've just urged my hang gliding friends to take a discussion over here, arguing that nobody can trust second and third hand information. (I'm still tracking down that awful Associated Press typo about "20 feet ... by 2100" that left out several vital sentences about the long time sequence for all the icecaps to melt, for example, which infests the minds of liberals worldwide now).
My main argument is, never mind what one's politics is, people need to read what the scientists doing the work have to say -- but also that Globalchange is relaxed enough to let people with very different political notions talk. Having done that, I don't see a real good place to start that summarizes the science. Probably because most people came to Globalchange having already spent a lot of reading time in other forums. I've suggested people read the various articles here, for one perspective: http://w3g.gkss.de/staff/storch/ because what he's quoted as saying in the popular press and PR sites isn't always what he actually said, and he's readable. Where else would the climate scientists recommend people look, who aren't --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
