On Feb 4, 12:49*pm, Natsman wrote:
On 4 Feb, 18:05, Dawlish wrote:
...
On Feb 4, 4:49*pm, Natsman wrote:
...
Present some evidence that temperatures are decreasing then, rather
than ranting. Then someone who counts might believe you and yours. You
can refer to whatever politically inspired thing that you wish, but
until temperatures begin to decrease, very few scientists will believe
as you do - about Joe *******i's forecasting prowess, or GW.

Just present some evidence of global cooling having started next time
you post, or research Joe B's track record yourself and show us that
his past forecasting success demonstrates that really is a LRF guru.
If you believe in what you do so strongly that you feel the need to
constantly tell us your views are correct, that's *all* you have to do
to convince. That's surely very easy?

Look, I am not a scientist - never pretended to be, nor have a said
that the planet hasn't warmed - of course it has, we're only just
exiting the last glaciation. *What I AM saying, is that any warming
has not been due to man's influence, particularly in relation to the
demon carbon dioxide. *I believe that other chaotic factors are at
work driving the climate, not least the effect of the sun. *I also
believe that the current lack of solar activity may well prove to be
the commencement of another minimum, which will result in planetary
cooling, and this process has probably already started. *I don't need
to provide evidence, because it's all around. *I'm old enough to
appreciate subtle changes, and I can glean all I need to know from the
internet, as can you, and the message which comes stridently across to
me is that almost everything so far published by those organs and
"authorities" who would have us believe otherwise, is corrupted with
fake data, extracts from magazines and dodgy modeling, to serve some
other purpose than pure science. *I find the independently published
science that I'VE seen far more convincing than anything to the
contrary, and judging by the increasingly adverse publicity, and the
attempts to defend themselves, the IPCC and others are merely serving
to compound their felonies. *Even the Guardian is wavering!

So I don't need to justify either myself, or my beliefs - suffice it
to say, the pendulum is swinging, and you and your ilk will eventually
become the minority shouting in the wilderness. *You only have to look
at how things have shifted over less than twelve months to realise
that opinion is fast reversing. *If you consider that a rant, well,
sorry, but accusations appear to be your only remaining defence. *I
can take it, it's like water off a duck's back to me, but it'll take
more than you to shake my long-held beliefs - maybe it is you that
needs to provide evidence, because so far most of the warmist's
arguments are dissolving like ice in a kiln.

CK- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Thanks for your previous advice about how I
should deal with my usenet attackers.

-----

Moving on, in my opinion the correct way to deal
with Dawlish is first to back up and establish scientifically
what the accurate climate record is over the past 10
years as average global surface temperature.

I believe the record shows a slight rise; I believe
there is no cooling yet.

Howsoever, taking off my climate science hat for
just a moment (which is a data centered mentality),
I am philosophically, emotionally, and intellectually
attuned to your position on all levels.

David Christainsen
Newton, Mass. USA