[cpbell0033944]

Egad, sorry for my slightly ambiguous statements.  I didn't suggest that you specifically were calling climate-change scientists liars.  I was referring to a general trend in society that puts the wisdom of "the common man/woman" above that of years or decades of research, in whatever subject or area of contention you might like to name.  As far as sceptic vs. cynic is concerned, it's probably quite a subjective distinction that we make.  I must confess that I (obviously incorrectly) got the idea from your post that you held your views pretty trenchantly, and that it would take a seismic shock (in evidence terms) to get to you to rethink.
I must also confess that I didn't realise that you were also scientifically-trained, indeed to a higher level than I am!  I normally don't throw my qualifications into an argument, because I'm usually a modest sort of chap – I tend to suffer from a lack of self-confidence (honestly).  The only reason that I mentioned it here is because I thought that if I quoted a respected scientist (Alan Thorpe), someone might have suggested that I was out of my depth, by assuming that I had no scientific training at all.  In addition, as someone who always found mathematics difficult, I find the topic of your Post-grad studies intimidating and will certainly refer any issues of mathematics on Amaz0ns to you in future! 🙂
I'll concede that Mars is perhaps a better indicator of solar activity than I suggested, but is it possible that its darker surface colour is a contributory factor in its response to solar activity?  Of course, 2/3rds of Earth's surface is water, which has a very high specific heat capacity, hence why maritime areas tend to have a more temperate climate in winter than inland areas, as I'm sure you know.  It looks to me as though we agree on Milankovitch cycles, as I don't deny that they are very important factors in the world's climate.  All I meant was that they often trigger extra release of CO2, thus accelerating warming.

Without wishing to sound rude, I did link the page that I intended – scroll down below the charts and you'll find a heading "Specific indicators".  I see your point about margins of error affecting conclusions about warming, but I would hope that any research that would be used in the Intergovernmental panel's report would have included proper statistical analysis of data to ensure that p=<0.05.  I'm therefore assuming that observed changes are statistically significant.  I also agree with you that more research is necessary to confirm a causal relationship between CO2 and global warming; however, as I see it our problem is that, if we do not act until the evidence is rock-solid (and I think it eventually will be), it may be too late to avoid the worst effects.  Surely it is prudent to take steps now?  I certainly would defend robustly my view that much more evidence to directly contradict a human causal relationship must arise before complacency can be allowed by society, and for the general public to bury its collective head in the sand could very well be spectacularly dangerous.

Sorry that this reply wasn't in bullet points, by the way! ::)

I'm still interested in why the US seems slow in changing its ways, though.  I suppose it could be that the vast majority of US citizens have read extensively in this area and are sufficiently well trained in the methods of scientific research to draw a controversial but correct conclusion, but please forgive my scepticism (or is it cynicism? ;D) if I suggest that it's unlikely.  Of course, many Brits are wedded to the idea that they have a right to drive even the shortest distances in their cars, and, in addition, we have the phenomenon of the "budget airlines" operating cheap flights to many continental European cities.  I saw a TV programme only the other week featuring a UK businessman who uses one of these flights as his commute to work. 😮

It's nice to have a properly brain-stretching debate with someone of obvious intelligence and learning such as yourself, and thanks for your restraint, given that we seem to have different views on much of the subject. 🙂

[cpbell0033944]

you are right on that one. I wish that society on a whole including the internet would accept muscular women. I mean what is wrong with a muscular women NOTHING is wrong with them at all the only thing wrong is that people take it diffrently like there should not be any muscular women out there at all. I think it is great that a woman can build her body to be lean and rock hard and muscular if she wants to or not. I for one want to build a nice lean hard body and have muscular women accepted in society and the net. Let there be a even balance between muscular men and muscular women and not this oh it always has to be one sided I am sick of that

It's heartening to me that there are several female members on Amaz0ns who espouse the femuscle philosophy.  This might seem rather contrived and uncool, but, heck, I'm going to say it anyway, because it's what I think – strong women rock!!  PumpedMuscle- YOU GO GIRL!!!! ;D 😮 ::)

[cpbell0033944]

She has a website at http://www.erintoughill.com, by the way. 🙂

[cpbell0033944]

<sob>I have an animated banner in my sig!</sob>

I think Mr Matthews is using a clever humourous device known as ironic self-deprecation – a rare comodiaty is the US comic repertoire. 😉

[cpbell0033944]

I'm afraid I could post 100 links to stuff like that. :'(  The material tends to fall into two groups.  Group one tends to refer to one of the very few fbbs whose faces show the ravages of imprudent steroid/growth hormone use, saying "this is what female bodybuilders look like.  Isn't she ugly?"  The second, much more misogynistic type shows one of our bodybuilding goddesses (Gina D, Britt M, Johaan D, Cindy P etc.) and says "Are these even women?  How are we supposed to find these shemales ( >:() attractive?  Women aren't supposed to have muscles!"
This second group is the worst – it's a matter of guys who feel threatened by the idea of female muscularity and take the righteous approach.
We've got a long way to go. 🙁

[cpbell0033944]

When I first saw her I found her to be very unattractive.  But now, I don't know what she's changed but she's drop dead gorgeous!

Me too!  Whatever the change is, she's got to keep it up!

[cpbell0033944]

What a beautiful and gorgeously-muscled lady she is! 😮 8)  And what a job – I am full of admiration for those who work hard in a job that not only helps people, but that often saves their lives!  The world needs more Jill Brooks's. 🙂

[cpbell0033944]

She's definetly in my Goddess's list (anyone remember that?!), and never has a strong lady had a more appropriate surname. 😉
Thanks Alex. 🙂

[cpbell0033944]

The second of those two Phipps drawings in Alex's post is fantastic!  The look on her face is so "sexy-confident", which is one of the reasons why I drool over physically strong women in the first place – it's that air of quiet confidence that, IMO is so sexy.

[cpbell0033944]

Oh my God – she does look like Joan Jett!

Which can only be a good thing. ;D 8)

[Author]

Posts