wrote in message
news:iywwi.1220$4w7.303@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "dechucka" wrote in message
> news:46c199a6$0$22599$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>
>> "Whata Fool" wrote in message
>> news:b2m3c3pscjdokng81s1e7v453m9b6i8s1n@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 19:54:57 +1000, "dechucka"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>what has Al Gore got to do with the paper under discussion being
>>>>unscientific and non interesting?
>>>
>>> The paper would never have been written if it were not for
>>> the nonsensical and greatly exaggerated claims by Al.
>>
>> pity they didn't do a better job
>>
>>>
>>>>> Don't feel bad, a lot of very capable people fell for it,
>>>>> and
>>>>> Al is a few hundred million better off, but that's ok.
>>>>
>>>>You seem to be straying from the subject
>>>
>>> You should read the paper again, it claims CO2 does little
>>> global warming, helping millions shake off the fear of horrible things
>>> to come.
>>
>> it claims a lot of things which it doesn't back up with science. To me
>> the unscientific nature of the paper means it is not interesting
>
> This paper is more scientific than anthing you AGWcultist have produced in
> 20 years and with over 50 billion in resources. The fact is you have no
> alternative. You have nothing that provides a scientific basis for your
> delusional belief that CO2 can/will increase atmospheric temperatures.
I do not take a position one way or the other. I am interested in good
science to show a point. The OP paper was crap
>
>
|