Terry Fields wrote:
Roger wrote:

The message
from Terry Fields contains these words:
Some two or three years ago I researched as best I could the published
evidence for and against 'global warming', as it was called then.
Then your best was just not good enough,

Well, perhaps it escaped your attention that, in a publication loaded
with bright primary colours and infant-school pictures, a major
government origanisation published a graph that said "there are twelve
suspected forcing mechanisms, and we know next to nothing about eight
of them. In the light of this profound lack of knowledge, this other
mechanism is the only one of importance".

If you can't manage to grasp that, then your best is, well, just not
up to it.

Thats because you were reading government ecobollox.

Don't mistake that for what the government actually knows or believes.

Government is not a monolithic organisation: it hasm, in these matters,
at least tow faces - one of which is about selling itself - and that's
using all the general ecobollox - and the other is about listening to
sound but unpleasant advice from people who can Do Sums and don't need
primary colours to read a document: hence buried deep in the boring
reports pu find a radical shift towards nuclear power in the governments
stated, but very much understated, policy.