[ale] Disappointed in the recent climate research hack

[david w. millians]

Jim Kinney wrote:
> As far as I can tell the only consensus in the field is that CO2 and 
> methane are "greenhouse gasses" and that an accumulation of them will 
> cause a change in global average temperature. What is under hot debate, 
> often with political and economic overtones and undercurrents, is how 
> much change and how fast. It is well understood from analysis of Venus 
> that a high CO2 atmosphere will act like a thermal blanket.

Seems obvious, but is it? I don't know. And that's the best way to 
approach science. I am concerned with some of the lockstep behavior in 
all of this; I *think* maybe we have started to affect things- goodness 
knows we don't get weather like we used to in Athens, but that could 
just be part of a cycle. There's just not enough data...

> Professor Lindzen is a very reasonable voice of opposition in some of 
> the conclusions presented by committees of climate science paper 
> reviewers. 

And we need more voices like his...

> He also is an opponent of  linking smoking to lung cancer 
> (he's a smoker). 

...except for the fact that he's a gold-plated idiot. Sheesh. You want 
to be an idiot, that's fine*, but please don't muddy the waters for 
people who aren't smart enough to know better. Correlation is causation 
here. Not everybody who gets lung cancer smokes- but it's a 4:1 ratio.

*not near me, please.