Is it any wonder that you fail to convince anyone of you're argument when you continue to latch onto one point and batter it to death, while ignoring anything you don't want to tackle.
The context of my statement:
"No amount of scientific reports of studies would convince me otherwise."
Is that I don't think it is creditable at the moment for science to comprehend the complexity of the forces that control world climate. In that respect I have read enough to convince me that we won't really know what is going to happen until it actually does.
Any fool can see that with so many varibles and consequent choices you can come to any conclusion you want to or are paid to.
The point about all this is that it's irrelevent anyway. If climate change is not caused by us then we can do nothing about it and if it is then we're not prepared to do enough to make the slightest difference.
Even the most optimistic estimates talk about reducing emmissions to those of somewhere in the 80's or 90's and those levels were already high enough to start the climate change ball rolling. Pointless.
|
|