On Dec 8, 11:50*pm, Bob wrote:
On 8 Dec, 22:56, "The Medway Handyman"

wrote:
That you continue to deny that the greenhouse effect exists or that
C02 is a greenhouse gas labels you as a complete nutter.

Or someone with a different, but equally valid opinion.

I want to stay out of the name calling, but you raise an important
point here because it is something I hear more and more these days and
which seems to be reinforced by the media. *Just because there is a
dissenting opinion does not make it equally valid. *

Nor does it make it a lie as some here seem to think.

It's stupid to try and argue against the greenhouse effect and CO2 as
a greenhouse gas but the remainder of the AGW debate is still just
that, open to debate. When really challenged, the AGW supporters
resort to name calling and ad-hominem attackes. If their science is so
settled why do they feel the need to do that?

We're not talking
about opinions about footballers or something here. *We're talking
about something that is established by the scientific method versus
something that is just opinion without the underpinning science. *It
was this sort of attitude that gave equal air time to that MMR idiot.

No, that was a misguided campaign by the Daily Wail. Everyone with a
scientific interest knew that Wakefield went public BEFORE the data
was peer reviewed.

It's similar in that the public are now being fed endless "caused by
GW" stories that have equally little basis in fact.

MBQ