[zook]

Then we are forced to believe that numerous American scientists are either totally stupid or totally marxist. I don't believe either of these assertions, but instead believe that there may be honest disagreements over interpretation of data.

[rob777]

"Then we are forced to believe that numerous American scientists are either totally stupid or totally marxist."



The third alternative is that the only ones who get funded, or quoted in the major media outlets, are the ones who parrot the global warming line



"I don't believe either of these assertions, but instead believe that there may be honest disagreements over interpretation of data."



It is more a question of using data from unreliable earth based temperature readings, which only measure local temperature changes, vs satelite data, which measures the whole globe. There is also the bigger issue of a theory bassed more on computer modeling, than on actual data. My background was in Civil Engineering, which includes environemntal science, and I have looked closely at both sides of the argument and concluded that the global warming theory has no merit.

[itsahoot]

Then we are forced to believe that numerous American
scientists are either totally stupid or totally marxist.

Ahh yes, the thousands of Nobel prise winners, that say it
is so, so it must be true. After all these people are the brightest
of the bright.

Problem is they are not climatoligists. Look at their research
then come back and report what they think about this.

Ever wonder how we had multiple Ice Ages? And all that before
man even thought of cars.