Jonno wrote:

I notice that you have now abandoned the issues raised by Coleman
altogether. I didn't think that they were wrth too much more effort either.

Measuring temperature?
See how its done...

http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/sh1/t...ook_2-3_lq.pdf


This climate change sceptic looks a little more reasonable than most of the
sources that you have found for us. At least not so obviously wrong as
Coleman. But before we play another round of whackamole (which I am getting
tired of) let me ask you this. Did you do any research to see if her
arguments stand up? Did you look to see if the debunker had been debunked?
If not you are ignoring her advise on page one. This does not need to be an
adversarial situation you know, you could check these things out yourself.

The above will show you how crazy this situation has become....
I know nothing, you know nothing.

If one can cause enough FUD you can paralyse decision making. There are
those who would like you to feel helpless but you can resist by using your
intellect. I repeat my invitation for you to do so.

We are all fed through a filtered straw of newspapers, run by
politically influenced reports.
Think, out of the box (I hate that saying too), before we all get put
into one..


Lead the way by doing something other than posting denial propaganda.

A statistician and a mathematical genius were interviewed for a job.
Asked what 1000 and 1000 added together equalled, the mathematician
answered, without referring to his calculator that two thousand was
the usual answer.
The statistician, closed the curtains, pulled out his scientific
calculator, which he'd previously brought from Kmart at a reduced
price, and asked, "what would you like it to be?"


Ho ho ho. All the arguments about long term trends are necessarily
statistical. Deal with it.


That folks is what we are dealing with here.
Were using ALGore Rhythms.

Very droll.

David