> Nice isn't it? I caught that too. Make it a little difficult to
> trust those aforementioned models upon which so VERY much is being
> wagered.
Well, if you refuse to consider theory and you basically make up your own paleoclimate evidence, and then go ahead and misconstrue what a GCM is, and misconstrue what whatever you have got your hands on actually does, I suppose that the model evidence WOULD indeed start to carry a bit too much weight.
Can Bill find a way to throw out the instrumental record too? Having no scientific evidence whatsoever except what one basically dreams up would leave room for a maximally free-form theory. What a glorious opportunity for self-_expression_! Free science from all those awkward "constraints" that the conventional scientists are always going on about!
With a little creative effort one might even bring leprechauns into it.
Bill's talent for generating a burgeoning collection of glib fallacies seems a little too practiced for me to trust his intentions, but whether he is doing this professionally or as a hobby, I don't think it is doing us any good here.
mt
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
