NavList:

   

Reply

If I am not mistaken, the "hockey stick" graph was proven to be dead wrong
and based on a statistical error.

http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?ide=4

We have the same arguments up here all of the time. I am not convinced that
the apparent increase in global temperatures is anthropogenic. I lean more
towards Milankovitch Cycles and solar output. As one poster put it, the last
150 years is a relative blip on a vast geologic scale.

I support the effort to cut CO2 emissions but for indirect reasons: we
should do all we can to conserve petroleum resources whilst we find
alternative energy sources. Eventually, we are going to run out and then
we'll really be hooped.

Robert




 The so called "hockey stick"
> curve gets clearer and more definite as more data gets thrown at it - a
> sure sign that it is not just a "bump on the graph".
>
> Geoffrey Kolbe


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to NavList@fer3.com
To , send email to NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply