Mark & Juanita wrote:
The number of REFERREED scientific papers that scoff at man
:aided CO2 is zero. Enough.

: To your latter point, given that the referrees for papers are all global
: warming adherents, there's not a lot of hope for papers demonstrating
: conclusions contrary to their faith.

You don't know a whole lot about refereed journals, from the sound of it.
The referees are well-trained, mainstream, reputable scientists.
Many hundreds of them. Do you think the editors of all the major
science journals in the world are members of a secret society
that has an agenda to promote the illusion of global warming? And that they
somehow have been able to identify the minority of scientists whole agree with them,
and have excluded all other scientists from the editorial review process?


: demonstrate another theorem, "for every PhD, there's an equal but opposite
: PhD."

And that contradicts your point above.

-- Andy Barss