[Strawbale] Global warming

[David Neeley]

Mark,

If you *read* my post, you would know that I take no particular stand
on the subject. I am neither a subscriber or a "denier" to the global
warming theories.

In addition, there continue to be skeptics and those who have
impeccable background and reputations who don't necessarily buy in to
this particular theory...including "climatologists" in fact.

I have spent many hours reading over the last ten years about this
particular topic, among others. My point is that accepting a
particular theory as gospel, without question, and putting down those
who don't agree as being somehow evil is about as non-scientific as
one can get.

It seems that many of those who consider themselves "liberals"
politically fall into the trap of assuming that anyone who does not
agree with them must be evil. That infuses the political discussion
today far too often--and it is obviously impossible to have a reasoned
debate when one side brands the other as evil and/or criminal.

Again--I do not have any sort of final, comfortable position on the
matter although I have read fairly extensively on it.

You appear to have neglected to get the point of my earlier post. As
you say, "read it and learn"...

David

On 2/3/07, Mark Bigland-Pritchard <mark at lowenergydesign.com> wrote:
>
>
> David Neeley wrote:

> But then, David, you're not a climatologist, are you?
>
> I find it amazing that somehow it's OK for those without knowledge,
> expertise or experience in the subject to pick and choose an opinion at
> will - and usually the opinion which best suits their ideological
> presuppositions.  I wonder how many global warming deniers/"sceptics"
> also think they know more about brain surgery than a consensus of the
> world's brain surgeons, or more about particle physics than a consensus
> of the world's particle physicists.