tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36150549.post2946639277635936986..comments2007-12-16T23:20:24.927-05:00Arathonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17128291835753372522noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36150549.post-91581421613437404442007-12-16T23:20:00.000-05:002007-12-16T23:20:00.000-05:002007-12-16T23:20:00.000-05:00the only problem with that study, though, is that it is by a <I>small</I> group of scientists. And, frankly, you can find a small group of scientists who will find data to back up any wacky hypothesis-- 9/11 conspiracy, no moon landing, TCM works, etc. etc. I think Al Gore is a fathead windbag and much of the alarmism is uncalled-for, but when you have 2,000+ scientists saying one thing and less than 100 saying something else, it's kinda tough to say you're going to go with a minority. Especially when they use phrases like "<I>suggest</I> that greenhouse models ignore negative feedback produced by clouds and by water vapor, that diminish the warming effects"crooked deep downhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17807079033464391000noreply@blogger.com