Richie 10,

Nope, there isn't. Read up, catch up, or keep reading the fiction you and runner prefer. What you aren't doing is helping your branch of religion, just making it look sillier.

Ever watched heated water runner? The circulation is the same, it just gets faster as more heat is applied.

Oh, that's right, you don't *do* science, nor read about it. You just get what suits pastor. Did you tell pastor his little cadged quote was "bearing false witness" by being taken out of context? You are a hypocrite, preached to by a hypocrite. Richie 10 sounds like he has the same problem.

Rusty

Severin,

I agree much of what he says. It's practical and realistic.

As I keep saying but the contrarian don't seem to understand, my belief in AGW/ACC is conditional i.e. the theory is far from complete, accurate to 5 decimal points so to speak. But the Science underpinning is sufficiently credible, to start action now, not wait untill.....

As a manager in a technical industry, experience has taught me that once the facts are clear enough to act upon one should activate planning/staged strategies, particularly if waiting untill absolute proof comes with an unacceptably high price tag.

Which in IMO we have passed that point and evidence daily seems to add weight to that conclusion

My science understanding goes as far as comprehending the problem, some idea of what goes into the logic and the basic science involved.
I also have enough experience to know when and perhaps how to ask an intelligible question of an experts.

I admit I have little patience for those who have no idea but have the arrogance/stupidity to assume they can second guess a *series* of discipline specialists. Especially when it's in the form of bald statements that "it's all BS" when all they can offer is zilch or outdated theories.

Likewise ,I find that most of the contrarian offerings thus far ignore or leave unexplained current indefatigable observations and or facts.

This included single quasi related disciplined practitioners who, frankly, exceed their competence levels with *partially* at best, theories.

All this means, that I trust the science enough to act, regardless of the IPCC bureaucratic cock ups(apposite archery term).

It's time we stopped with nit picking, as a means of ignoring the issue because it's inconvenient and started serious planing and implementation of damage mitigation strategies that can be ramped up/down as and when the evidence suggests.
_______________________________________

qanda
As I respect your superior knowledge, the 'how dare I comment baffles/concerns me. Care to indicate the area, as I can't see your point?

Examinator,
<<I don't support the clear cock ups (archery term look it up) of The IPCC bureaucracy.Nor do I condone the errors of one scientist at CRU but it needs to be seen in perspective, of the amount of damage it actually caused in the science.....two cents worth of bugger all>>

But you can’t pick the icing off the cake and leave the base.Glaciergate stemmed from the nature of the IPCC, to quote Paul Monk ( ALR) , it had moved from a body whose intent was to critically examine the evidence for and against, to “ a political body committed to finding evidence that AGW was a reality”

<<Glacier gate was a bureaucratic error i.e. the 35 year time line. Not the state of the glaciers/Tibetan Plateau and consequently the major rivers. Ive posted the sites before.>>

Ice formations have generally – at varying rates – been in retreat since the last ice age . That is nothing new.What is new is it is being yoked to a political campaign to fund the UNs wishlist.And that campaign has been very effective. I cite your periodic seizures about hundreds of millions displaced persons – as indication as to just how effective it’s been with some of the more impressionable among us.

<<If that sounds like hedging, it is. Science theory never tells it as absolutes, merely probabilities....which are relatively high.
Sensible conclusions, are never black or white, if they are then they're probably wrong.>>

There is lot more room for doubt than you allow for, Horatio-Examinator.Even the IPCC doesn’t say CO2 is THE cause, only a CONTRIBUTOR.

<< I admit I have little patience for those who have no idea but have the arrogance/stupidity to assume they can second guess a *series* of discipline specialists>>

ROFL . There are none more arrogant and ill-informed as those who believe all the “*series* of discipline specialists” lay on one side of the debate.With all due respect, you need to read a bit more widely than qanta's OLO posts.
.

Dear Rusty,
Which branch do you adhere to. Me, I stick like glue to the tree of life. I would rather believe the words of Jesus of Nazareth (confirmed by the dead sea scrolls as accurate) then any other belief system. For I have tested and found them to be true. I have no idea how to test Charles Darwin's theory of evolution as all species I have personally observed, reproduce after their own kind. So I guess your faith is much greater than mine.
Richie 10

Examinator

<< It's time we stopped with nit picking, as a means of ignoring the issue because it's inconvenient and started serious planing and implementation of damage mitigation strategies that can be ramped up/down as and when the evidence suggests. >>

Agreed. Which is why I posted part of the article to which I linked. It is a relief to read something that is simply down to earth common sense.

I understand your 'conditional' position on AGW. I am probably a step further along than you, in that I believe that the massive increase in actions on the environment plus the increase in population equals an effect on this planets ecosystem. It is degree that I am uncertain of. The best predictions can only be based on present knowledge. We may not experience the most dire predictions or they could be even worse than anticipated.

To argue on about trivialities as our world leaders and other vested interests are continuing to do is very dismaying. We have sufficient knowledge to invest in clean sustainable technologies now. And still we delay...

Richie 10,

So, like runner, you don't know much about biology, do you? Just what pastor tells you. Read up and catch up.

Rusty