Michael Plante <michael.plante@gmail.com> wrote:
(snip)

(snip)
> The words "climate change", as opposed to "global warming", have the
> interesting interpretation of being untestable: no one in their right mind
> should expect the climate to stay the same, whether man exists or not. I
> should also point out that one of the key scientific debates (and most of
> the typical banter you hear is not) is about positive versus negative
> feedback, where the "input" to the model is primarily man-made CO2,
> something that, in itself, is not enough to significantly affect climate.

Why do you say that? Have you considered how much CO2 we put
into the atmosphere every day, where it goes, and how fast?

If not, what basis do you have for your statement?

> The feedback mechanism proposed, interestingly enough by both sides, is
> water vapor, a more substantial greenhouse gas. Indeed, historical records
> show CO2 levels *lag* temperature (varying amounts, but 800 years or so
> rings a bell), but it's possible to zoom the plots out enough so you can't
> tell that, as Gore does.

-- glen