re: #122 Naso Tang

Your comment about Charles was trite and boring, which is why it deserved no more than a ding. Opinions without backup don’t go far.

I did comment on your hero in an earlier thread, Lindzen
Wow…talk about anti-intellectual non-sequiturs…you’re responding to me through lostlakehiker? If you can’t keep something as simple as a we thread straight…how much value should we place in your superior understanding of Earth’s climateS (plural…don’t ask…you’ll get a headache).

Your response to Lindzen was amusing…in a Bobo the Clown sort of way. Sadly for you…I asked you to respond to a SINGLE sentence from the article. Here it is again…for the third time:

“The notion that complex climate “catastrophes” are simply a matter of the response of a single number, GATA, to a single forcing, CO2 (or solar forcing for that matter), represents a gigantic step backward in the science of climate.”

Now…focus…a simple sentence has been presented to you. Please address IT (without the childish defense of Charles and his new found anti-intellectualism).

[As an aside…I’ve been a registered member for many years and have precious few posts…please consider THAT before you ban me…tashakur, bamone khoda…)