On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 20:44 -0800, Michael Lewis wrote: > Per Edman wrote: > > 2010/1/25 Michael <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > > > This assumption is increasingly questioned by multiple, > > independent lines of evidence. > > > > > > Such as?
Such as? I'd like to hear where you (or these un-named climate scientists) break with the consensus. Do you think that energy is conserved? Do you think that CO2's spectrum has been measured incorrectly? Or is there something wrong in the physics of radiation? Or in the accounting of human added CO2 in the atmosphere? Or ... what? -- Phil Hays <[email protected]> -- 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
