My apologies - I didn't see your remark.

I think it was better to post the whole conclusion though.

John Testa
SLPS Homewood
708-647-4346
[log in to unmask]



                      Mark Wonsil
                      <[log in to unmask]        To:       [log in to unmask]
                      m>                       cc:
                      Sent by: HP-3000         Subject:  Re: [HP3000-L] Sagan Warming was OT: US Politics
                      Systems
                      Discussion
                      <[log in to unmask]
                      TC.EDU>


                      10/21/2004 03:13
                      PM
                      Please respond to
                      Mark Wonsil






[log in to unmask] wrote:
> You forgot the author's final summary:
>

Uh, doesn't this count?

> BTW, this author still believes that there is a human component to global
> warming.  Read the whole article if you want the details.

I, too, don't like to post whole articles and that's why the link was
there.
People who are interested, like yourself, will go and check it out.  This
also keeps the digest small for those who subscribe that way.  OTOH, I also
didn't post this:

"Unfortunately, discussion of this plot has been so polluted by political
and activist frenzy that it is hard to dig into it to reach the science. My
earlier column was largely a plea to let science proceed unmolested.
Unfortunately, the very importance of the issue has made careful science
difficult to pursue."

I wasn't making any claim on what Sagan would have said.  If I were to
guess, I would think he would agree with the author.  Although, it would be
hard to claim that Carl Sagan was not a political animal.

Mark "Be kind.  Trim your posts." W.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *