"Roger Coppock" wrote in message
...
On Jan 26, 9:58 pm, "obonz" wrote:
A third of the world could face starvation

.21 Jan 2009

Gary Sides, a cattle nutritionist for Pfizer Animal Health, argues that
changes in sunspot activity, not greenhouse gases, are primarily
responsible
for global climate change.

Who or what are you going to believe "a cattle nutritionist
for Pfizer Animal Health," or the actual measurements?

Directly observed data from the last half century give
little reason to believe that sunspots alter global
temperatures. Recent global mean surface temperatures
have not tracked sunspot numbers at all, but those same
temperatures track atmospheric CO2 concentrations very
well.

CO2 or Sunspots: Statistical Correlation Chooses
------------------

Thanks for your explanation. This is exactly why people, who have not
progressed from highschool math, just don't get the point you are making.
They usually try the lies great lies and statistics bit, without knowing why
it was said, by whom and pertaining to what circumstance. If that fails they
make an adhominem (which you needlessly made as well ...) which distracts
from the actual context of the calculation, which was correct and I checked.
A mere please to check the calculation and its conclusion would have been
fine in positioning this all too obvious defence of corporate interests.

R