🚀 go-pugleaf

> On 29 Sep 2004 19:38:28 -0700, info@economicdemocracy.org (Economic
> Democracy) wrote:
> 
> >* With almost every combination of greenhouse-warmed oceans and
> >atmosphere and formulas for storm dynamics, the results were the same:
> >more powerful storms and more rainfall

Wm James wrote in reply: 
> Neither of which has been found in nature yet, only in the failed and
> failing computer models.
> 
> Learn a little science and stop making a fool of yourself.  
> 
> William R. James

New Message:

Economic Democracy, how good are the credentials of the US government
scientist who's announcing these results?

He's fairly well up there in the profession, isn't he?  

William R. James writes that we should "learn a little science," and I
agree.  But the little science that I learned in graduate school at
the University of Michigan 30 years ago indicated that the "greenhouse
effect" was real, and that
global climate change should be on the way. At least this was what my
professors believed at the time.

This also seems to be the view today of the many high-level scientists
around the world who have signed on to the IPCC reports.  However, I
admit that my "little science" doesn't really enable me to judge the
competing claims of the ranking experts in the Global Climate Change
camp and the Denialist camp, respectively.

For me, that makes the reputations of various experts important.  So
how good is this guy's reputation?  Why should we believe this
government expert
as opposed to, say, William R. James?