quote:
It just baffles me why you spend so much time and energy on this when there are people paid to do this stuff for you.
So are you telling me that you would submit your vote to any which person that volunteers to make your vote (whichever way)! I think not (otherwise, you would not be here)! You are here to "have your say" as much as the next person (like myself). I implore dialogue!
As an engineer I'll be the first to admit that the recent conjecture and theory that science "turns up" is often "hard to digest" (at the least), but so many of these - theories, conjectures - are so outside of the real and natural world that they really do need to be taken to task. The science domain is currently so full of pseudo-science that the "real science" just doesn't seem to come through.
Guess why I post.
quote:
I would have thought that the most comforting thing is that if we are responsible (ok, albeit partly), then at least we can do something about it.
A most important statement Luci! The point is, is our AGW signature enough to make a difference (either way)? What does comfort have to do with this?
But then again, that is a factor of what the AGW debate is about.
Personally, I don't want to pursue this line of debate further. I'm more interested in the science of it.
quote:
And in the meantime, the temperature just keeps going up and the ice keeps on melting (even though TSI is going down!).
Another reason for my interest in this subject.
BTW. New ice is increasing in the NH (looks like dirty ice melts, but new ice [devoid of particulate contamination] doesn't)!
Best regards, suricat.