No. He's making known it's source. I get the impression from you that unless someone has a degree in physics, then any commentary on global warming isn't worth the time of day.
I didn't bother to read further.
I find it interesting that the person who made that comment is still making more comments on this thread.
Anyone who thinks if the predictions work out, we can regard the hypothesis as proven just doesn't get it.
How did the laws of motion and thermodynamics start, as manna from On High?
I didn't mean to give that impression. I don't have one but I have some interesting things to say nonetheless. The difference being that I know what I don't know and don't pretend otherwise.
I find it interesting that the person who made that comment is still making more comments on this thread.
The responses can be interesting or amusing. For example the guy who called me a dim bulb but is unable to solve a problem I could in a few hours. But also one of the other posters made some good points. I guess you could say the thread is lot's more informative than the article.
How did the laws of motion and thermodynamics start, as manna from On High?
Scientific laws are derived from observation, they are straight forward extrapolations of those observations. They are not explanatory in the way that hypotheses and theories are. So I'm not sure why you bring these two up when clearly we are talking about hypotheses and theories.