On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 05:09:21 -0800 (PST), Scott W wrote:

On 8 Jan, 11:13, Graham P Davis wrote:
Paul Hyett wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 at 20:48:09, Paulus wrote in
uk.sci.weather :

I do wonder that if Global Climate is now getting over its recent "hot
Flush"
and now has a chill setting in (cycling as it always has done without
the help of AGW Inc.)
I wonder how long the Gloabal Warming Industry will continue to flog
their dead horse?

Yes, I know that any short term cooling will be sold as yet further
proof of global warming.

They'll probably still be claiming *that*, even as the glaciers roll
into London & New York...

And the anti-AGW cretins will probably still be claiming that Global Warming
isn't happening, or is caused by natural cycles that nobody else has found,
or changes in the sun that haven't been measured by instruments, whilst
London sinks below the waves.

--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks., UK. *E-mail: newsman not newsboy

I don't think you can discount the arguments against GW - just as you
cannot dismiss the few who believe the climate moves in cycles and
weather patterns are affected by sun spot activity. The Earth and
humans have evolved, there's no question about that - but one cannot
ridicule creationists either. We simply don't know the answer to the
above questions - those who think they do are arrogant in the extreme.

Perhaps one good thing to come out of the global warming argument is
that it has got man to clean up his act. Anyone who was around during
the London smogs that used to affect the capital year after year would
heartily agree... We are indeed lucky to be guests on this Earth and
it was long overdue that we started giving it more respect.

It depends what you mean by a creationist. The most extreme ones think the
earth is 6000 years old so ridicule seems an appropriate response in that
case.

Alan