[cicero's_son]

Non-scientists are not really qualified to make conclusions. I really don't put too much stock in what non-scientists say just like I don't put much stock into my optometrist's opinion about my tooth ache. I ask the dentist.

This would be an excellent point....if we were talking about science.

But we're not. 99.99% of the literature on "global warming" is no more scientific or valid than early 20th century theories on physiognomy. It is a pseudo-science in the service of a political ideology.

When we elevate it to the level of "science," we've already conceded the high ground.

[A Ruckus of Dogs]

But we're not. 99.99% of the literature on "global warming" is no more scientific or valid than early 20th century theories on physiognomy. It is a pseudo-science in the service of a political ideology.

Cicero, I think you've got your mind set on an opinion, serviced to your own political ideology, and nothing is going to change it, not even mounds of data. I am an engineer so I do know about science, I am fluent in the logistics of data collection, and what I'm seeing does indeed point to the consensus conclusion. If you're not willing to take the conclusion of a metereologist (and one of our own at that), we're just going to have to leave it at that.