On 24/10/2006, at 10:32 AM, Andrew Crystall wrote:
On 23 Oct 2006 at 17:11, Dan Minette wrote:
Meanwile, other - very well documented - research is showing that
less light has been hitting the Earth. By a degree, on average, of
some 22% in Israel - with comparative figures elsewhere.
Let me offer a fairly good and balanced website's take on this:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=105
Heh. Try elsewhere for anything LIKE balanced. I'm NOT going to go
into
the entire flamewar about why. (Hint: PR flacks, not scientists)
Well point us at it, because while you may disagree with their
conclusions, they are indeed scientists. It's possible to disagree
with an analysis without casting someone as a lackey of whatever
conspiracy you want, Especially without providing evidence.
We know from the post-9/11 shutdown and the data gathered then the
high significance of vapour trails. Each and every study done comes
up with consistant results.
Yes, and there's still honest debate about the long-term implications
of this.
Every single climate model developed without global dimming is, as
things stand, a waste of processing time. There is good science to
say that cleaning up our atmosphere might be nothing short of
dangerous - the data on what would cause a runaway heat reaction is
looking gloomier and gloomier as time goes on.
But again, the levels and effects are still not fully understood.
Dismissing entirely a source just because a two year old article
disagrees with your current thinking doesn't seem rational.
They may well be wrong. And there certainly is a crisis - the
acceleration of the Greenland melt is testament to that, as are the
worsening conditions here in Australia and elsewhere.
Charlie
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
