[Kickaha]

Um, Dorian, stop for a minute and please read what I wrote instead of skimming it and jumping to conclusions about what I meant.

I am not arguing that global warming does not exist.

I am not arguing that we are not likely to be a major cause.

I am not saying that none of the science out there reporting on it is good.

I am saying that, according to the climatologists that I worked with back when Kyoto was being drafted, and my own understanding of chaotic systems, and interdependent simulation systems from my math degree and years of simulation research, specifically the results presented in the Kyoto treaty as the likely outcome are bogus. That is all. Not the cause, not the reported effects, but the most likely long-term outcome. Not even any other research. Just Kyoto. Just the long-term outcome.

Does it mean it shouldn't be signed? Of course not.

But it left critics a freaking barndoor open to drive opposition through, when they didn't need to screw up like that. They had good science, and they chose to fuck it up at the last minute in the name of creating something that would look more urgent. They needed a solid wall of rationality, and the left cracks in it to play the politics game when it wasn't necessary. Those cracks were just stupid, and we've been paying the price for them ever since.

Like I said, they had two equally dire outcomes to choose from, and for some reason decided to muddle them into a scarier sounding one that *wasn't* predicted, and isn't based on any rational foundation.

This was the opinion of several well-respected individuals who *have* spent their lives researching exactly this area, and who I had the pleasure of working with.