Martin Lack, when you stop making things up about me, we can maybe have a discussion. Until then, this is my last response to you:
<blockquote>Brandon, I’m sorry but, I can’t see where you contradicted me: What else apart from atmospheric CO2 concentrations has changed significantly (i.e. steadily) – increasing by 40% – since the Industrial Revolution?</blockquote>
First, "significantly" and "steadily" are not interchangeable. Your parenthetical here is nonsensical. Second, it's extremely easy to find sources discussing such, but if you need help, try <a href="http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch2s2-9-3.html" rel="nofollow">this</a> link I provided elsewhere on this page. You'll quickly see many different things have changed, not just CO2, and it's only by considering the combined effects of all these things we can hope to reach any sensible conclusion.
<blockquote>For “scepticism” to be worthy of any merit, you must have an alternative hypothesis capable of explaining all the change that has occurred since then; and <b>is now accelerating ahead of IPCC predictions</b>.</blockquote>
The part I made bold is dumbfounding. I don't know what makes you think it's true, but to me, the most likely source seems to be someone's delusions.
<blockquote>Therefore, now that we know that burning fossil fuels is causing the problem, we should stop doing it ASAP.</blockquote>
This is either a horribly phrased comment, or a completely idiotic one. I'll leave it to you, and other readers, to figure out which.
<blockquote>Your “wait and see” attitude is just simply irrational.</blockquote>
You have no way of possibly knowing that is my attitude toward global warming, yet you not only attribute it to me, you deride me over it. I have no idea why you did such, but it makes talking to you completely unappealing. At the point you flagrantly make things up about me, I have no reason to trust anything you say about anything else. If you can't get the obvious right, how could I expect you to get anything else right?
↧