Comments on: Brit Hume’s Special Commentary on Climategate (VIDEO) http://www.msunderestimated.com/2009/11/brit-humes-special-commentary-on-climategate-video/ Reality Bytes Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:41:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: deekaman http://www.msunderestimated.com/2009/11/brit-humes-special-commentary-on-climategate-video/comment-page-1/#comment-118604 deekaman Tue, 01 Dec 2009 12:59:19 +0000 http://msunderestimated.com/?p=4545#comment-118604 The response of the (alleged) AGW acolytes has always been, "we just don't understand what the data is telling us." Never, "We could be wrong about this Climate Change stuff". So why should their response to Climate-gate be any different. This is a religion, not a science. We are talking an increase in CO2 of 80 parts per million, from 300-380 ppm. Now that would seem like a lot until one recognizes that 80 parts per million is 0.00008 (I think I got the zeros right) parts per hundred or 0.00008% of the total atmosphere. (Again,make sure my math is right here).<br><br>(Alleged) AGW doesn't pass the smell test. The response of the (alleged) AGW acolytes has always been, “we just don't understand what the data is telling us.” Never, “We could be wrong about this Climate Change stuff”. So why should their response to Climate-gate be any different. This is a religion, not a science. We are talking an increase in CO2 of 80 parts per million, from 300-380 ppm. Now that would seem like a lot until one recognizes that 80 parts per million is 0.00008 (I think I got the zeros right) parts per hundred or 0.00008% of the total atmosphere. (Again,make sure my math is right here).

(Alleged) AGW doesn't pass the smell test.

]]> By: deekaman http://www.msunderestimated.com/2009/11/brit-humes-special-commentary-on-climategate-video/comment-page-1/#comment-118399 deekaman Tue, 01 Dec 2009 06:59:19 +0000 http://msunderestimated.com/?p=4545#comment-118399 The response of the (alleged) AGW acolytes has always been, "we just don't understand what the data is telling us." Never, "We could be wrong about this Climate Change stuff". So why should their response to Climate-gate be any different. This is a religion, not a science. We are talking an increase in CO2 of 80 parts per million, from 300-380 ppm. Now that would seem like a lot until one recognizes that 80 parts per million is 0.00008 (I think I got the zeros right) parts per hundred or 0.00008% of the total atmosphere. (Again,make sure my math is right here).<br><br>(Alleged) AGW doesn't pass the smell test. The response of the (alleged) AGW acolytes has always been, “we just don't understand what the data is telling us.” Never, “We could be wrong about this Climate Change stuff”. So why should their response to Climate-gate be any different. This is a religion, not a science. We are talking an increase in CO2 of 80 parts per million, from 300-380 ppm. Now that would seem like a lot until one recognizes that 80 parts per million is 0.00008 (I think I got the zeros right) parts per hundred or 0.00008% of the total atmosphere. (Again,make sure my math is right here).

(Alleged) AGW doesn't pass the smell test.

]]>