rw wrote:

>
> You're wrong that, Spike. Peer-reviewed scientific opinion is unanimous
> that man-made green-house-gas pollution is affecting the climate. It's
> completely consistent with common sense if you look at the trend for CO2
> in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution:

Junk plain and simple. You're simply spewing the same crap the sprout
eaters have been blabbing to the media for years. There was never any
pier review involved in the so-called consensus, which was never
unanimous, ever, even in the wildest dreams of the most sprout eating
sprout eater.

If you're looking for facts by real scientists, you can look he

http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/trc.html

The synopsis, the most basic research upon which the so called
"consensus" was based, was misguided, in some part fabricated and in
large part fraudulent, and was never once pier reviewed, ever, by a
single scientific or government body in the entire world, before being
included as the main evidence in the IPCC's report to the UN, which was
the beginning of the magic show upon which Kyoto was sold to (some)
industrialized nations. We're talking about the very premise of
supposed man made global warming. It's one of the most heinous snake
oil sales jobs in the history of the world, supported in large part by
people like yourself who simply repeat the unfounded rhetoric that there
was ever a real consensus.

>
> http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/...o2_change.html
>

More snake oil meant to fool the masses. Read similar to this a dozen
times, it's always the same bunk. I guarantee there's an extreme
concentration of CO2 two inches from the lips of every one of these
pseudo scientists every time they open their mouths on the subject. But
since they baited you so well, and since I want to help you, I'll let
you in on a little secret: they use the term "concentration" because it
conveniently avoids the unfortunate fact that the overall level of CO2
in the atmosphere is exactly what it has been for centuries, about
..035%. That's what it said in text books when I was a kid, and that's
what it says in text books today. The bait and switch of measuring
concentrations over industrial areas, which has nothing to offer when
discussing the planet as a whole, is more of the same.

> We're basically driving this car called the earth and not changing the oil.
>

Beautiful rhetoric of no substance. Repeat it a million times, and I
have no doubt the sheep will accept it as a true analogy, just like the
consensus junk.