Thanks Chuck for sharing your thoughts with your usual  rigor. (though I feel
a bit like a messenger who has just been shot... ;-)

I would not be so hard on those who report on such matters in the press.
They are all lawyers and do not always assign the same weight to words that  you
do. Especially with the "P" words like plausible, possible,  probable,
potential and the like.

And as for everyone going to read a report in detail, it would be nice  but
it is not going to happen. We have gotten much too used to the sound  bite.
What would be better, however, would be to at least  provided links to each such
finding rather than forcing the reader to  dig. Not every one has the time,
even if they have an interest.

You do a fine job of pointing out the uncertainty of this  kind of science
and I have long taken that as a given. Especially when one looks  back in time.
Tree rings, receding glaciers, ocean born storms and  polar ice melts are the
primitive tools we have to gauge  with. Not an enviable tool set to work with
even with the aid of super  computers.

I don't have definitive answers as to what this means in the long  run,
neither to the authors as you point out. They found a  few identifiable trends over
the last century that look  like "hockey sticks" (see graph on page 2) It is
not just  Mann. Unfortunately (or is it fortunately? ;-), you and I will be
long dead  before the final results are in so we are not going to be able to see
the  final results and know for certain if they were right or wrong about
global warming and humanity's role if any. (Personally, I feel that we are
having an effect, how great and effect, I don't  know)


Give some credit to the authors that they at least made an effort to  couch
their findings when they knew that the did not know and did not  resort to
statements of certainty as we have heard from many of  those who promote
lead-free. With lead free we do now know the effects  and science has supplied answers
but many folks simply ignore the findings.  Which is better?

Thanks again for your thoughts.

Kind regards,
Joe