[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Nuclear Power Des NOT Need Global Warming Hoax!

To: "Radsafe \(E-mail\)" <radsafe@list.Vanderbilt.Edu>
Subject: Re: Nuclear Power Des NOT Need Global Warming Hoax!
From: "John Fleck" <jfleck@abqjournal.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 11:59:14 -0600
References: <20040602134428.38858.qmail@web60205.mail.yahoo.com>
Reply-To: "John Fleck" <jfleck@abqjournal.com>
Sender: owner-radsafe@list.Vanderbilt.Edu

Raymond -



Not sure when the last time you looked was. See http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/297/5586/1481/F1 (subscription required), a summary graph that compares long climate proxies, instrumental records, and model results. It's from Science, Vol 297, Issue 5586, 1481-1482 , 30 August 2002.



Cheers,

John

  ----- Original Message ----- 

  From: Raymond A Hoover 

  To: Johansen, Kjell ; Radsafe (E-mail) 

  Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 7:44 AM

  Subject: Re: Nuclear Power Des NOT Need Global Warming Hoax!





    By the way, last time I looked, none of the computer models did a very good job of recreating historical patterns of weather or temperatures, so why should we believe predictions based on those same models?

References:
- Re: Nuclear Power Des NOT Need Global Warming Hoax!
  - From: Raymond A Hoover <ray2hoover@YAHOO.COM>

Prev by Date: General guidelines for the assessment of committed doses from incorporationmonitoring data
Next by Date: RE: Nuclear Power Des NOT Need Gobal Warming Hoax!
Prev by thread: Re: Nuclear Power Des NOT Need Global Warming Hoax!
Next by thread: US EPA docket OW-2003-0070 - Office of Water radiochemical methodsproposed notice - June 7 deadline
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread