On Dec 1, 2:40*pm, spop...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
> Rune Allnor *<all...@tele.ntnu.no> wrote:
>
> >On 1 Des, 19:21, spop...@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote:
> >> Don't buy it! *Don't let them control the debate.
> >Keep the politics out of this.
>
> Um, sorry, posting links to Wall Street Journal articles is
> injecting politics into. *Don't blame me.
>
> >In plain English: The climate models aren't good enough.
>
> "Aren't good enough" for what purpose? *What standard of
> proof is needed to make a political decision to implement
> more pollution controls?

The whole point of the global warming debate is whether CO2 is
pollution. Why not use the word "CO2" instead of pollution. I, for
one, do not view CO2 as pollution.
The CO2 controls (which you seem to think is clever to call pollution
controls) that seem to be desired by the GW folks, are really economic
controls and individual liberty controls.

>*Ultimately this is a political
> decision, isn't it?
>
> >The argument has nothing to do with politics.
>
> Sure it does.
>
> Steve