Well, suitably exposed as an intellectually arrogant prima-donna
Quote:
|
Well that is the first time I have seen anyone look at isotopes. Thank goodness there are some real scientists still around. Actually I'm kicking myself that I didn't think of doing that myself.
|
, BVL seeks to justify his sloppy thinking by putting the onus on to me to prove Spencer wrong.
Not so, - in this forum it is a favourite technique of AGW sceptics to post links, usually to anti- AGW articles, and then very often add no comment or ones that show they haven’t read or understand the detail of the argument in the link. (I raised this very point in ‘complaints’ a year to 18 months ago).
This thread is a classic example of this – with mpkdavies adding his usual prattish comments, - but which showed that he had no idea of the detail of the argument therein.
This has happened so many times, & the same old topics re-raised from the dead, that I really haven’t the time or interest to pander to closed-minded sceptics.
The technical debate over GW (Is it real ?) and ( what causes it /) is over – dead in the water for many years – and with AGW the clear winner. Any debate now should be about how quickly and how we need to reduce CO2 emissions and capture as much CO2 as we can from the atmosphere.
I have just read the book “6 Degrees “ by UK’s Mark Lynas – and as I said in a post somewhere else, ‘It frightened the **** out of me’ even tho’ I probably won’t be around to suffer the effects..
Just be grateful I gave you the links when I did – before you had gone down the road of further humiliation.
I think, from previous posts, you have some claims to being a scientist or interested in science. I suggest you read around the whole GW subject before you pontificate (I think I’ve said that to you before – if I did, obviously you haven’t followed my suggestion ).
A good intellectual starting point would be:-
1. Do I agree, or not, that GW now is real ? – if yes, goto 2.
a} if not sure try to seek out evidence from books / internet / media / political sources or wherever supporting both sides of the debate. Then, if you conclude the evidence is in favour of GW, then goto 2 If you think No,
b) Visit, say, Alex Jones’s conspiracy website and/or bone up on conspiracy theories
2. Work your way thro’ reliable scientific sources – such as the Realclimate link I gave, and see what conclusions the expert, independent scientists have come to, and the reasons why.