fred smith wrote:Why is the conversation over?
Has Mick or anyone else proven that Morner or Gray do not have a point? They dismiss them as not scientists or not correct scientists but then never prove themselves why either is unacceptable or wrong. Have they done so here?
You've had three or four technical refutations from different people and you've taken no notice, or you've been unable to understand what's been said.
How much of global warming is due to man? does anyone have an exact figure? I would say 10-15% and if that is what it is and the likely scenarios are what they are then I don't DONT care.
Why then is my stance so ludicrous? are the sealevels rising? NO. I cannot see that they are and that fits in with Morner and Gray but they and their views cannot be accepted because x y or z
Your stance is ludicrous because you keep banging on about sea levels as if it were the be-all and end-all of everything. You're looking at a forty-foot mural and complaining about the colour of the artist's signature.
btw Mick, yes, that editorial was pretty interesting but I disagree with the writer's conclusion, which is basically that "liberals know how to think and conservatives don't". My beef with that is that I have no idea what a "liberal" or a "conservative" is. As far as I can make out, those groups seem to be defined by certain traits - a liberal is (apparently) someone who is good at applying acquired knowledge, while a conservative is not. So of course the experiment will have the results described. What's certainly interesting is that a lot of people are so convinced that others are trying to hoodwink them that they refuse to believe anything except some narrow range of views that has been placed into their heads by talkshow hosts.
NO ONE anywhere is doing anything about global warming along the lines that were demanded 20 years ago. Those who did sign up have no designed so who is the conservative here? Me or the entire political establishment in every country of the world?
Yes they are Fred, and mostly with private funding, but you don't know about them because you only read people like Vincent Gray. Besides, the whole thrust of your argument seems to be "we don't need to do anything". But there's no such thing as "not doing anything". We're doing all sorts of stuff. It all costs money. It just happens to be the wrong stuff. But again, you had no answer to that point (I think HH said the same thing a while back); instead, it's back to sea levels again. So if you're not going to move it forward, then yes, conversation over.