Quote:
Originally Posted by Arragonis
Apart from Neil ignoring the arguments posted against AGW some of the time (and we have posted 30-odd pages so maybe he's allowed), I think he does post facts most of the time, so that one is a little unfair IMHO.
EDIT- What I tap 'facts' I mean 'facts from his standpoint'. But it means the same thing.
|
Taken at face value, he does post a few facts to back up his point of view. However, these facts are so interwoven with subjective conclusions on what the facts mean, that for most of the time, it's impossible to really tell where facts end and opinion begins. For instance, it's a fact that the ice shelves in Antarctica are calving ice, and it's a fact that their overall area was shrinking for the time period used by AGW true believers. However, the conclusion came to by AGW zealots is erroneous in light of the fact that the total mass of ice in Antarctica was actually increasing at the same time. Shrinking ice sheets makes for great news bites. Increasing total ice mass at the same time? Not so much.