RE: [Paddlewise] Water's been warm for this time of year!

Well, I ain't no scientist that's for sure, but if I use local changes to
refute GW, I'm told I'm looking at it too locally, so while I'll admit other's
may have noticed changes in their lifetimes that coincide with it, it seems
the same practive should rule. I've always been impressed with people on this
list as far as their scientific accumen, but even at that level, it seems the
climate challenge is beyond even their knowlege. So we each put our belief in
the scientists whom we feel have some real grasp on the subject. My problem is
with people who claim the scientific skeptics are all oil industry hacks.
Seems like Mike and Paul and I are the only ones here who disagree with the
idea of AGW, but I don' t remember anyone here using terms that would be
considered libelous or slanderous. Please do tell me if I'm wrong there, as my
main problem with this whole issue is the lack of civility when dealing with
the other side.

That said, I would like to think the revelations from the admittedly stolen
emails might make a few on the GW bandwagon at least wonder if some of the
ardent supporters have let their views color their judgement. Doesn't it
bother you a bit if scientists want to try to  squelch the freedom of
information acts in order to hide their data? But then this whole issue is
rather new and it's too early to say whether the revelations coming out are
real and of importance.

So I remain a skeptic. Whether we're in a cooling, warming or neutral period,
from what I've read I don't buy the correlation between a warming earth and
CO2. Mike tried to offer his proof to his beliefs, but it all comes down to
who you believe.  Though I'm a skeptic, I appreciate hearing from people whose
knowledge and integretiy I've come to trust from their years of posting here.
I'm glad to hear Dave was once a skeptic, but changed with his experiences,
perhaps I'll get there one day. But what I won't do is accept that the GW
scientists all act with pure hearts and all the skeptics are hacks. When I see
the amount of money now and future to be funneled from gov agencies into only
one side of the debate, I see a reason to skew the debate. But if you agree
with Al Gore that there should be no debate, it's all moot

I will admit, I'm still just trying to figure out how many tipping points
we've already passed to be too sure of anything! I'm also not sure that GW
would be a bad thing in the long run. I can't imagine anyone would be
complaining about it if we had permanent ice sheet covering Moses Lake!!
Perhaps I'm a bit gun shy after buying into the New Ice Age of the '70's! So,
sorry if I shook up the hornet's nest again, but I think the debate, even at
our level, is of some worth.

Mark
***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************