I won't show gratitude you separately as you each and every one be familiar with who you are, have explain that there's a huge plan going on that involve nearly the entire world's weather scientists.
http://www.qoutz.com/thank-you-quotes

That post above left me wondering? what is it about.
Consider this thought, but know I think no room for doubt exists.
Man made climate change exists side by side with natural change.
And that we should confront ours.
And I think putting a price on pollution/limiting use of pollutants is the right thing to do.
Now the question.
Why the conspiracy theory's from both sides.
Why is one side driven by big money.
I think a true conspiracy exists.
And its driven and paid for by self interest.
Just maybe we are living on a planet owned by wealth and power, not us.

Actually Belly, I don't think a conspiracy exists on either side.
I think that there is a genuine difference of opinion on AGW.

There are a few on each side that are over the top in their
pronouncements, but they are easily filtered out.
As in most things the truth will be somewhere down the middle.

My present concern is that up to date data does not seem to have been
used. The new data will not prove the case one way or the other but it
will modify the temperature projections.

Bazz,
I suspect that, unintentionally, you've put your finger on the real problem.
You, in all sincerity, say there's a genuine difference of opinion.
This is science. More than 95% of the scientists in the field of climate science are convinced that AGW is real.
I would suggest that:
A) there is little room in science for opinion. Science is based on fact and probability, and
B) if those ignorant of the science hold one opinion, and those thoroughly educated in the science hold the opposite opinion, then I put it to you that the former opinion is not genuine as it has little basis in reality.
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

Oh Gord Anthony will this make you happy;

Actually Belly, I don't think a conspiracy exists on either side.
I think that there is a genuine difference of conclusion on AGW.

Actually, Bazz, it doesn't make me happy.
I was trying to be... Laid back in my comment, but what the hay, let's tell it how it is.
Opinions or conclusions about a scientific issue that have no basis in science cannot be 'genuine'.
They are by definition, false.
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au