I must admit jem. You are a good arguer. You approach it as if it was a rock to crack and you find weak points in terminology or tiny errors in speech or testimony. Like all lawyers you don't look for actual truth, you defend a position regardless of it and without needing any justification for defending it. The client pays and you do it.
Of course you know CO2 is a greenhouse gas and higher levels of it will raise temps. Of course you know most of the new CO2 is from the burning of fossil fuels. Of course you know that we can expect to see and probably are seeing the results of this higher CO2 as higher temps. i don't think you are that stupid as not to believe that. Correct me if I'm wrong.
But that would not make a fun argument for you would it?
Of course you know CO2 is a greenhouse gas and higher levels of it will raise temps. Of course you know most of the new CO2 is from the burning of fossil fuels. Of course you know that we can expect to see and probably are seeing the results of this higher CO2 as higher temps. i don't think you are that stupid as not to believe that. Correct me if I'm wrong.
But that would not make a fun argument for you would it?
