Jed - What Jeff said later. I was just having fun with your response, no harm intended.
- Rick > -----Original Message----- > From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 10:21 AM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: RE: [Vo]:first day in carbon capture > > Rick Monteverde wrote: > > >The assertion made by > > > Fink -- that high > > > CO2 levels do not affect human respiration therefore the global > > > warming hypothesis must be wrong -- is not supported by data or > > > theory. . . . > > > >[Fink] may be incorrect, but it is not nonsense. It is supported by > >some data and some theory. > > Okay, what data and theory? Where is it published? What are > you talking about? I have never heard of anything like that, > and Fink did not supply the names of papers or references. > > > >The assertion made by [Rothwell] -- that [Fink's claim is wrong and > >therefore the global warming hypothesis must be right] -- is not > >supported by data or theory. It is a straw man logical > fallacy; he is > >refuting an argument that no one makes. > > My assertion was not a straw man. Fink clearly made the > argument that there is no danger from global warming as long > as CO2 levels do not affect human respiration. (To put it > another way, he claimed that the basis of the global warming > hypothesis is rooted in measurements or assertions about CO2 > affecting human respiration.) That is unprecedented and > without any scientific basis as far as I know. If you know of > some foundation for this, Rick, please enlighten us. Or if > you claim that is not Fink's argument, then what was it? > > - Jed > >
