William T Goodall wrote: > The arguments of the global warming deniers has so far run like this: > > 1) There's no such thing. > 2) There is but humans have nothing to do with causing it. > 3) We do cause it but getting a bit warmer is a good thing. > 4) We do cause it and it's a bad thing but it's better to do nothing > now. > > All of which are ways of saying do nothing. And are equivalent to > believing (1) and lying to persuade others to go along. > > Religion = Lies Maru
Are you equating the deniers with religious zealots, or the believers? Most of the sceptics I've seen would add a 5) The believers are preaching, and trying to force everyone to change their way of life to suit the believer's theory As soon as you say the sceptics are "Lying to persuade others" you cross from objective to subjective. It only takes 30 seconds on the 'net to find insurmountable evidence of AGW and insurmountable evidence of no long term warming and insurmountable evidence of warming due to non-human factors. It's all down to which data you pick to base the claim on, and which you ignore (and both sides of the AGW debate are doing both every day). Cheers Russell C. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
