Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyrotex
I read the article, "Acquittal of CO2" from beginning to end. Most of it made good sense to me, especially the correlation charts, and the solubility chemistry of CO2.
But it didn't make perfect sense. I finished the article with a sense that something was being hidden from me, that my attention was being directed one way, to divert me from... what? I dunno. The article isn't "complete" in a sense that I cannot describe. Perhaps it was the lack of recent CO2 measurements. Or maybe some interpretation of the Vostok data that the author did not wish to unconceal. Again, I dunno. I am left uneasy and dissatisfied.
|
As a laymen, I am trying to be fair and open minded in regards to AGW. If I come across something that argues intelligently against it, I am just as interested as I should be for arguments for. It is a very important issue and I am trying to clearly understand the arguements from both sides. I pretty much always feel like there might be something that is being hidden from me.
Thanks for the reply.
