are climate change deniers naturally gullible?, page-91

No, I have no chance to visit Tarong. Low cost has nothing to do with efficiency. I hardly need to visit a power station, a degree in Chemical Engineering gives me all the thermodynamics I need. Actually, grade 10 physics is probably enough.

So you cannot show me where I am wrong. The rubbish is coming from you - that sort of junk is what is giving sceptics a bad name.

Both sides are throwing data and opinions around like confetti at a wedding - and most of it is worth as much. There are very few hard facts involved in the global warming debate - and none in the climate change one. There are at least a couple of theories about global warming, not necessarily backed up by observable facts. There is no theory about climate change which has stood up to any test.

FACT: CO2 levels have risen at a steady rate since 1958.
FACT: Water vapour is the biggest greenhouse gas, in terms of both volume and effect.
FACT: we don't know how much wv there is, or was, or how it varies.
FACT: the estimates are that wv is between 3 and 8.5 times greater a greenhouse gas as CO2.
Probable fact: Global atmospheric temperatures have risen in the last twenty or thirty years.
THEORY: that increasing levels of CO2 will increase global temperatures.
Theory supported by probable increase in last twenty years; weakened by several lengthy periods of cooling and warming in Europe and North America in the last 2,500 years. (In Roman times, vines grew in England as far north as York, yet CO2 levels were around 250).