Pooey..
Quote:
|
Ever more the diversionist. No one has ever claimed that natural cycles don't exist or that we're not experiencing it and it's the change climate we're experiencing which cannot be explained by natural phenomena that has lead to the development of human induced Global warming model.
|
I'm not sure you comprehend my position. I have repeatedly agreed that we are in a warming trend. I have repeatedly mentioned that I believe there are climate cycles. I have repeatedly suggested that there is no certainty to the current orthodoxy that human caused emissions are a major factor in the current warming cycle. The studies themselves are replete with assumptions and computer iterations that IMNSHO are flawed.We can't even predict current weather conditions a week or so from now with absolute certainty..how in the hell can we do so with climate one hundred years hence?? I have pounded home(with examples) the scare tactics that the Press including opportunists like Gore(You will note his documentary made millions which you deny he might have shared in?) promote are speculative.
And yet you post this?
Quote:
|
and it's the change climate we're experiencing which cannot be explained by natural phenomena that has lead to the development of human induced Global warming model.
|
You suggest that this human induced model is valid because we can't explain the naturally caused pehnomena as having a certain affect.
Is that logical? We can't prove or demonstrate something so therefor we concoct a model with certain assumptions built in,that has to be correct? What we substitute for a model we don't agree with has to be correct because we feel the original model is incorrect?
I'm not diverting, I'm questioning the logic...I refer you to a recent primer on logic..."Logic Made Easy" by Deborah J. Bennett 2004...W.W. Norton company, London