by mister2 » Wed May 09, 2007 9:44 am
Ok, lets for a moment assume that you guys are right. So then where are the JOURNAL PUBLISHED, PEER REVIEWED papers debunking the link between CO2 production and temperature?
There are far far far brighter people than me studying this area, and they publish their results in academic journals. To my knowledge, the vast majority of the JOURNAL PUBLISHED, PEER REVIEWED papers support the hypothesis that CO2 production is linked to temperature.
Also, to cover my ass, I did say:
Now it is debateable as to how much we're changing it, whether it has been worse in the past, whether we can do anything about it, whether we want to do anything about it, and I'm not getting into that.
Note that I did not say that the climate is static or has been static in the past. I definitely think that climate science is far far far more complex than people (especially TV program making people) give it credit for.
I (personally) fully subscribe to the ice core records of temperature and think that, as a race, we've been bloody lucky with the climate. I don't think we're going to ramp down fossil fuel use anyway, not until it becomes economically unviable/find a cheaper replacement.
Personally, I think we're living in interesting times haha.
Nick
www.nzefi.com
4WD Dynapack Dynamometer.
Link, MoTeC, Greddy, Power FC sales support and tuning.
Weapon of Choice: 1992 NSR250 SE
On hiatus, current location: Cambridge, UK