As I say if you want to debate some part of the science please post a link to a credible scientific paper that argues your point. We all know what the concensus is amongst the most eminent climate scientists in the world. To just tell me that what you believe is just from 'hints scattered' on the internet doesn't exactly fill me with confidence about the credibility of the imformation. Now I may have a science degree with a major in meteorology but I would be the first to admit this doesn't make me any sort of expert. I would only claim that maybe if I had gone on and received a PHD and then went on to work or do research within that field of science. I didn't so I am no expert but like any person who is not an expert in something I seek my knowledge on the subject from the experts. I mean I could easily write up something that looked scientific making all sorts of claims and post it on the internet and I could guarantee that there'd be some fools out there who'd quote what I wrote to back up their arguments somewhere. That isn't science. It's why knowing exactly what sites you are getting your 'hints' from is important and why I am asking you to provide links to the science you are making your conclusions from. Just because it's on the internet doesn't make it true or even remotely credible you know?
