Jed: >>I am saying that both are based upon the same knowledge of atmospheric physics that knowledge is demonstrably impressive. When you say that the hypothesis cannot possibly be right and the experts ought to know better, I say that's chutzpah, it is insufferable, and it irks me!
C'mon Jed, buck up and suffer it. It's not my intention to irritate you. I'm saying it because I see it. And others who, unlike me, have legitimate claim to expertise in the field, also see it and published it. It's not chutzpah, I actually do have enough experience in computer science to understand what they are talking about, having myself written recursive code and observed first hand the same characteristics they describe. That at least qualifies me a bit to make somewhat educated comments on the matter, regardless of whether you agree with the comments or not. And now you've got me making excuses for my having made some comments here on Vortex, which is silly. It's not about me at all. The computer models are not the whole deal. There's other evidence against the A in GW. It is not a tiny minority of scientists who take this position, nor is it only those employed by oil or coal. It is a significant minority and it is growing, not declining in number, not that I'm a big fan of determining scientific issues by polling numbers. But I have no problem being in the minority if I have a good reason. - Rick
