D
Darwinist
Guest
...skeptics' side of the debate? I think this idea,
...that the warming at the poles is due to an increase in undersea volcanic activity and this increase is caused by a planetary conjunction...
...is the strangest that I've seen, but I am a relative newcomer. There must be more...
...what is your favorite?
Jeepndd... Okay pole if you prefer, the point is that there is no evidence for extra volcanic activity to cause the warming.
To say that something has happened without evidence is bad enough but to sugest a chance alignment of two or more planets is responsible? Well that is just absurd!
I would have thought that even most skeptics would agree with that!
...that the warming at the poles is due to an increase in undersea volcanic activity and this increase is caused by a planetary conjunction...
...is the strangest that I've seen, but I am a relative newcomer. There must be more...
...what is your favorite?
Jeepndd... Okay pole if you prefer, the point is that there is no evidence for extra volcanic activity to cause the warming.
To say that something has happened without evidence is bad enough but to sugest a chance alignment of two or more planets is responsible? Well that is just absurd!
I would have thought that even most skeptics would agree with that!