Loved the pun.

I have to admit, my only training in physics is from a High School
Physics class. So I will have to take Brian's word that the rules of
physics change from planet to planet. There must be red physics for Mars
and green physics for Earth.

The earth is supposedly warming, at the same time that another,
adjacent, planet in the solar system is warming. On the earth it is due
to man driving SUV's and heating homes, but on Mars it is due to ....
well, something else. It could not be the Sun, because if Mars was
warming because of the Sun then the Earth would be too, since the Earth
is so much closer to the Sun. But then, being a layman I don't know.
Maybe it has something to do with the ratio of the wavelength of light
to the distance of the Earth from the Sun. Mars is just at the right
distance so that it's global temperatures are influenced by the Sun
while the Earth is not. Maybe if Earth were just a few million miles
further away then we would be capturing those rays just right to allow
the Sun to impact Earth's temperature.

Of course, whether Europe and North America were ever covered by
glaciers is still an open issue. Because if they were and those glaciers
melted away, it would suggest that at one time the earth was colder and
then warmed up. But if we accept the premise that the only cause for the
earth warming up is modern human activity then North America and Europe
could not have been covered in glaciers in the past because they were
not covered with glaciers during Henry Ford's lifetime. I suspect then
that those Wooly Mastadon fossils found in the US are probably fakes,
like the remains of the Piltdown man.

But I am prepared to ignore the "documents that are full of holes" or
any study that does not comport with the public opinion driven by
headlines and political motives.  Let's say we limit the debate just to
the IPCC reports. In case anyone has not read them lately, the
conclusions in the reports are based solely on computer climate modeling.

Again, I will have to admit my lack of sophistication in such matters,
but I have often heard the aphorism "Garbage in, Garbage out." or as one
of the early pioneers in the computer field once put it
        "On two occasions I have been asked [by Members of Parliament],
        `Pray, Mr.  Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures,
        will the right answers come out?'  I am not able rightly to
        apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such
        a question.  - Charles Babbage".

So I will refer, hereinafter, only to the IPCC reports to develop my
challenges to the "global warming (or if you prefer - global climate
change) theories.

Chuck Dolci

Brian Ellis wrote:
> Chuck, I'm not going to argue with you, because you have adopted, yet once more, your
> usual Luddite position, operating on semantics and documents that are as full of holes
> as Emmenthal cheese.. Let us simply agree that the jury is out on the mediaeval
> warming period, which has no relevance to the current situation, in any case, and that
> Martian climate has no relevance to the earth's, a total red (planet) herring.
>
> Brian
>
> On 18 Dec 2003 at 17:09, Chuck Dolci wrote:
>
>