Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
By 'open minded' I meant that I don't accept everything at face value. And what I said was that there is not a proven link between carbon emissions and warming because the atmosphere absorbs so little carbon.
Incidentally, the reason scientists are not trying to have an open debate about this is because they are shouted down and threatened.
Anyway, it is clear you are just sucking it all in so you won't want to consider anything which is contrary to the establishment view, so 'nuff said.
|
'Sucking it all in", "establishment view" .. really?
Let me put it this way: if you are right, the case is not proven and so we should delay until the doubters are convinced, we would arrive at the point where it is too late. Is this a prudent strategy?
Maybe we should proceed on a basis of caution and assume the case for climate change has been provisionally proven and attempt to slow down or reverse the effects. What is the worst that can happen, a cleaner planet?