Lindzen is a serious scientist, as well as a dissenter from the currently fashionable consensus, so when he says ...[omitted]...I take it as fact.
Then -- quicker'n a snake in a blender -- you say:
He then claims that there's no reason for alarm, that the CO2 build-up is not-threatening. Bullshit.
Cherry-picking, anyone?
Face it, pal: You have a religious belief.
It's called Global Warming.
Lindzen doesn't back up his statement with much either. We're not doing science here, we're doing political argument in sound bites. Lindzen wants you to believe that a massive build-up in CO2 will not have serious environmental consequences despite a very strong, 500,000 year correlation between atmospheric temperature and CO2 levels. I don't buy it. He's got to present much stronger arguments than he does before I'd even seriously consider it.
Face it, pal: You have a religious belief. It's called Global Warming.
You know that's not true from my last post to you on the other thread. In fact, I'm not religious - I don't have that kind of mentality. You do.