>Hi Hilmar,
>I have done extensive reading on the subject, and I am fully aware of the assumptions they have made and also the skew they they put into their models to get the results they want, this is driven by their need for funding.
>
>The thing that concerns me is that, if actions are taken to correct the problem using data from their skewed models the results could be far worse than the problem itself. Time will tell.
So, that would be some sort of mega-conspiration, with thousands of scientists collaborating over many decades, to deceive the public.
I find this highly unlikely, like most other conspiracy theories - but then, of course, you can never know.
Difference in opinions hath cost many millions of lives: for instance, whether flesh be bread, or bread be flesh; whether whistling be a vice or a virtue; whether it be better to kiss a post, or throw it into the fire... (from Gulliver's Travels)
