re: #472 Bagua

We getting too nuanced here, the study is, as Liberal Classic pointed out, one of science. Some aspects, such as the thermal forcing of the ‘greenhouse gasses” is very well understood and demonstrable under laboratory conditions. I don’t see this as much in dispute or a question of hoax or bias.

What is less compelling are the models that make projections into the future and theories about positive and negative feedback.

The hoax is not the science, the hoax is the media and political distortions. Research and funding should continue.

Not just sure what you mean about thermal forcing of greenhouse gases, but - again - two issues: (i) is it harmful, and (ii) does the Earth (you know, the place outside the laboratory) compensate for anything we piddly humans can put in the atmosphere.

And I fully agree with you about the media and political distortions, incidentally. I just think the research and funding is not going to resolve anything - the questions are too massive and complex for our puny abilities to amass meaningful data (time frame, alone, is prohibitive).