Jon: I would appreciate it if you stop referring to every scientist that doesn't agree with your views on Man- Made Global Warming as a Pseudo-Scientist. It's silly and insulting and does not do you any credit. There is a growing list of Scientists, approaching majority in fact, that do not agree with the Man-Made Global Warming Theory. They are not all (in fact there are very few if any are) crack-pots and on the payroll of the oil companies, the CATO institute, Heritage Foundation or any other group you currently don't like. The fact is warming has been occurring for a very long time. That does not mean it is caused by man, that is correlation, not causality. Wild claims about the weather changes and creating a frenzy around it may be good for TV ratings and News Paper and Magazine circulation but that does not make it fact. Repetition is not fact. I am old enough to remember the Panic in the 60's that the world would soon not be able to produce enough food to feed to swelling (over) population - some how we managed. I remember the 70's where we had only 10 years of oil left before the Earth was going to go dry, some how our known oil reserves have managed to double every ten years. Later that decade we were told we were facing a World Wide Ice Age because of - wait for it - increased levels of CO2. I'll never forget the Cover of Time Magazine showing the world covered in Ice. And yes this data came from Government and U.N. sources and was considered to be very reliable. Strangely despite the government assurances that their data was correct none of these disasters occurred but we are still suffering from the knee-jerk reaction of Politicians wanting to use the current crisis for social change. That list of Politicians is long and distinguished. I think there is more than sufficient reason to de-politisize and reduce the rankor and name calling around the ever increasingly political debate about whether the current warming trend is completely natural, man-made or a some combination there-of. Politics is not going to provide an answer, only scientists, over time, allowed to do real research outside the influence of any government body will provide answers. And like it or not, that type of research is still very rare. Robert Taylor -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of stormcrow60@xmission.com Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 11:23 AM To: utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Utah-Astronomy Digest, Vol 73, Issue 29 Hi Josephine, Obviously, by the data you provided, it is slanted information. My next question is: Why would a supposed "scientist" do this type of work that could easily be researched and debunked? He obviously went out of his way to cherry pick his data to conform to his own ideology. I bet if looked into, one might find Mr. Monckton's research to be funded by the fossil fuel industry or some right wing think tank. Have you noticed that all the global warming debunkers have to use other peoples' data? They have no data of their own. They always cherry pick from NOAA, NASA or some other scientific organization. And every single time they are exposed by the media, other researchers or the scientists who accumulated the data. This happens time and time again. So why... why on Earth would anyone ever... ever rely on these pseudo researchers for this type of information. If you want to find the real data, go to the source ie; the government sources. The government sources contain the only real believable data. Well... aside from the studies released by the Bush admin. Jon _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com