The message
from Terry Fields contains these words:

snip

Because it may be irrelevant, or overstated, or masked by other
mechanisms, and yet one is being taxed on it while not looking,
sounding, or walking like the only mechanism in play.

Such a response is entirely out of keeping with that science hat you are
unsuccessfully trying to wear.

You haven't mentioned any science at all, nor seemingly posted any
responses to my quoting e.g. from the Met Office web site, so please
don't parrot phrases like "(the) science hat you are unsuccessfully
trying to wear".

Just for the record very little of what you have been saying could be
classed as science if you apply the same test to what you say as you do
to what I have said.

Your claim that CO2/global warming is a myth is entirely unscientific as
is your subsequent claim that it is irrelevant and/or may be masked by
other factors. If the greenhouse effect is real then reducing
atmospheric CO2 will mean that the Earth will be cooler than it
otherwise would have been. Likewise increasing CO2 will mean that the
Earth will be be warmer than it otherwise would have been.

snip

If that is the case then 15000 or more of the non supporters have been
incredibly quiet.

Or lack the funding.

Since when has lack of funding stopped publication in peer reviewed
journals?

Christ...because the experimentation is costly. You can't do cosmic
ray flux measurements with a Blue Peter approach.

But these 15000 are the bulk of the 17000 you claimed were already involved.

snip

You might be happy to live at minus 18C but I wouldn't be and on that
point I am absolutely sure I am part of a very large majority.

Argumentum ad populem. No place in science.

Not a latin tag I have come across before but looking for it did point
me in the direction of another that seems to fit both Huge and, to a
lesser extent you - Argumentum ad hominem.

"An argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"), in logic, is
a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because
many or all people believe it; it alleges that "If many believe so, it
is so.""

Not exactly appropriate to my opinion of the majority wanting to live in
warmth rather than cold but entirely appropriate to the dedicated band
of fundamentalist denyers who refuse to accept the possibility of
climate change.

snip.

--
Roger Chapman