Global dimming and ice age predictions after WW2 contradict global warming theory - alt.global-warming

Message from discussion Global dimming and ice age predictions after WW2 contradict global warming theory
Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Lloyd <lpar...@emory.edu>
Newsgroups: uk.politics.environment,alt.global-warming
Subject: Re: Global dimming and ice age predictions after WW2 contradict 
	global warming theory
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:05:07 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <17f2b474-70c7-435d-94b7-13d4d72a0482@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>
References: <41e9fec6-9149-4b92-83ee-3e3f2f92d8b5@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> 
	<dd02a966-2fe0-4a70-87bb-37f66bc5e0a2@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com> 
	<_cadnSFawoMF0z3VnZ2dnUVZ_sHinZ2d@comcast.com> <fa6ee197-0545-4461-9dbd-c9c3c5342e68@l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com> 
	<E4idnU-NKoXCcD3VnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@comcast.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 170.140.55.46
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1218564308 17722 127.0.0.1 (12 Aug 2008 18:05:08 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:05:08 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=170.140.55.46; 
	posting-account=EDxswQkAAAAMtpGIdULRoliPhqEA85o4
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.16) 
	Gecko/20080702 Firefox/2.0.0.16,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)

On Aug 11, 10:02 pm, Rich <some...@someplace.not> wrote:
> Lloyd wrote:
> > On Aug 11, 10:45 am, Rich <some...@someplace.not> wrote:
> >> Fran wrote:
>
> >> [...]
>
> >>> Here's somerthing pertinent for you in which a discussion on aerosols
> >>> takes place
> >>>http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11/4/14560/6189
> >> Aren't they the ones demanding Nuremberg-sytle trials for dem 'ebil
> >> deniers? You'd probably support that Fran.
>
> >>> You might also want to look atwww.realclimate.orgorlook at the work
> >>> of Joseph Romm
> >> And realclimate is the very definition of a vested interest.
>
> >> Got any unbiased sources?
>
> > Just National Academy of Sciences, Royal Society, American Geophysical
> > Union, American Physics Society, NASA, NOAA, EPA...
>
> Are they unbiased? Or do they simply echo biased sources?
>

Oh give us a break.  Either you're a 10-year old or you're a kook.

> If you claim that they have no vested interest in AGW, feel
> free to show it.

If you have half a brain, feel free to show it.

>
> > And we know you don't have any unbiased sources.
>
> You believe lots of things Lloyd. But I don't need sources
> to ask you the basis for your beliefs. You are the source.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rich
>
> >> Cheers,
>
> >> Rich
>
> >>> Fran