Michael Lewis wrote:
> Eric Swanson wrote:
> > Your response again suggests you have no clue about the physics
> > involved. Your reply ignores the finding that the recent rise in
> > atmospheric CO2 is larger than any period since the beginning of the
> > present period of glacial/interglacial climate. I suggest that you
> > should learn some science before you spout off and demonstrate your
> > ignorance.
> >
> I'm very tired of the badgering, hectoring quality of these posts,
> suggesting a lack of confidence in the science so clumsily bandied about. Is
> the science insufficient? Is it necessary to prop up a weak argument with ad
> hominem remarks?
>
> This is the argument of a petulent child.
Oooh, I'm so hurt. I think I'll throw a tantrum.
But first, Mr. Lewis, please tell us about the basic physics of energy
flows thru the atmosphere. Don't you agree that the optical
properties of the atmosphere govern this process? Perhaps you aren't
aware of the fact that the entire problem of global warming rests on
the changes to those optical properties. As the saying goes, if you
can't take the heat, don't go into the kitchen.
E. S.
---
--
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
