Guaranteed I'm not stalking you LH. It's barely worth the bother to read you and deal with your woeful errors that you attempt to pass off as irrefutable fact when I stumble across them. Most I let slide by, but occasionally I will respond. You should be grateful for an audience with the perseverance to shed some light on your dim-house. If you are referring to stalking elsewhere, you just happen to have bought into a stock that I have largely sold out of except a small holding I kept to access a CR pending development. Other than that I look here now and then to see if any real science is being discussed.
What is a "carbonian-cultist" Denmor? Except a label? I think carbon tax is a bad idea, does that still make me a carbon cultist? I'm more concerned with discussing the science, which mostly means having the odd laugh and poke at the conspiracy theorists and the psuedo-scientists. It is hard to give them a label, except perhaps deluded, because the platforms vary significantly between individuals. I agree with HH that denialist is inappropriate, and for those without any scientific knowledge - skeptic is as well.
There is the science and there is the politics and evidently by this forum it is the politics that takes precedence - and that goes for both sides of the debate. I've never bothered to TOU the content here for being politics over science, but I guess the mods are happy to have this discussion here and not making the politics thread more untidy.
