In sci.physics Einar wrote:
wrote:
In sci.physics Hop David wrote:
wrote:
Neither is statements like "the rest of the world disagrees".
How's this statement: CO2 is a greenhouse gas.
It is the beginning of a hypothesis, so it would be a start.
And no, I'm not going to argue about what "greenhouse gas" means.
I thing global warming would be a net good thing, so I'm not concerned
and could care less about the arguements either way.
Oh, I'm sorry, the current politically correct term is climate change.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
Greenhouse, what about, a type of gasous substance which precense in
sufficient amounts makes the climate warmer than it would be in its
absence...does that suffice for a definition? Now, you only have to
accept that carbon dioxide can make the climate warmer if it?s present
in sufficient amount to do just that. From that would follow arguments
wether that is the case or not.
What part of I'm not going to argue about what "greenhouse gas" means
are you too blazingly stupid to understand?
How have you worked out that Global Warming is a good thing?
Clue number 1:
How many people book vacations to Alaska compared to Barmuda?
Clue number 2:
How many crops, i.e. food, are grown between 45 degrees and 90 degrees
compared to +/- 45 degrees?
Clue number 3:
The population as you go through Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska,
South Dakota, and finally get to North Dakota.
Clue number 4:
People retire and move to Arizona, New Mexico and Florida, not Maine,
Minnesota or Washington.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.