"I suspect we will see significant warming in the the next 10 years - not because I am an expert in all the science involved"
Why? Because out of all the available evidence pro and con you prefer to believe the pro despite evidence to the contrary?
"I do not believe there is a vast conspiracy of the scientists around the world "
There has been shown to be collusion if not conspiracy in the hacked emails. So what is the problem then?Even if not conspiracy as such, there is a lot of groupthink in all walks of life, and science isn't exempt.
"No I think we are setting up our children for a much more difficult world."
In comes the emotive words kids and better world etc. Irrelevant. All generations make the best of the world they are born into.
"If the predictions of the scientific community does come to pass and you are a sceptic now will you be honest will your children and say yes despite all the evidence you helped delay any action "
More correctly that should read predictions from some in the scientific community, opposed by others.More emotive stuff about honesty, blah blah, designed to discredit sceptics , implying that they are dishonest. "despite evidence" what evidence? Therefore the rest of the para is meaningless if one doesn't accept the premise that there is evidence.
"and what will your reasons be (1) you dislike Gore/ Rudd etc (2) your superior scientific analysis (3) you believed the anti-AWG Propaganda that there was a vast conspiracy based on lies and millions of scientists were in on it"
Or how about (4) As a person of average intelligence and life experience, can you see the discrepancies with the evidence presented, conflicting claims, political involvement, large amounts of money involved for the bankers via ETS, suppressed views and plenty of propaganda to wash the whole lot down?
Yep, I went for number 4
"I can't say I'm 100% sure but if you are wrong what reasons will you give your children"
Again more emotive guilt producing blah blah kids etc blah blah.
