"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"martin" wrote in message
...

Call me a naive crackpot, but I'd chose Nick in preference to any
journalist.
--
Martin


Please don't kid yourself. McLaren is the Crackpot here. You are
merely clinging onto his coat-tails.

McLaren questioned my use of cycles in relation to various
aspects of Global Warming.



Prof Mark Saunders, Benfield Hazard Research Centre

Ah, a Professor, you would be a real expert then?

From my contacts with professors over the years, most of them are so bound
up with their own importance, they have absolutely no idea of what real life
is about.

Alan


The forecast spate of hurricanes in 2005 is part of a multi-decadal
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
cycle of fluctuating sea temperatures.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"It is a natural cycle of a period of about 50 or 60 years," Professor
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Saunders told the BBC News website.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

/quote


I'd stay in the shallow end if I were you. Certainly if you're relying
on the likes of Crackpots like Mclaren, to blow up your water wings
and keep you afloat.




michael adams

...

In article ,
"Alan Holmes" writes:
|
| From my contacts with professors over the years, most of them are so bound
| up with their own importance, they have absolutely no idea of what real life
| is about.

That is a trifle unfair. The number that are so self-important that
they bullshit about their own field is relatively small, though not
unfortunately negligible.

But that is largely irrelevant to this situation, which is that of
a Guardian reporter mangling a complex and subtle scientific problem
and that of a naive layman mangling it considerably further and
then claiming that his misunderstanding is what was stated by the
original expert. In this case, don't blame the professor :-)


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.