Thought I'd repost Steve Firths defence in an earlier posting (Al Gore)

It shows that he admits that CO2 is an issue and If CO2 is an issue then he
admits by default to Climate Change

Hip hip HOORAY

I suggest that Doug keeps a copy for when he starts telling us there's no
issue again OR If he calls others liars :)

Steve Firth wrote:

Indeed, and I was asking this question in 1970 in school chemistry
lessons when I was laughed at by the teacher who insisted that CO2
emissions could have no negative effects. So it's not as if the
possibility wasn't obvious to a child, and indeed something that I
haven't personally given a lot of thought to over a very long time.

However the current hysteria is unwarranted, and the behaviour of the
so-called greens in respect to CO2 emissions is hypocritical in the
extreme, badly thought out and largely unworkable. Rather than doing
something they prefer to protest about everything.

Tommy wrote:

So what?

Brimstone wrote:
so what

BECAUSE he's been going on amd on and on and swearing, an' cussing telling
us there was no issue in his less than humble opinion

On Oct 15, 11:57 am, "Tommy" mal.com> wrote:

A lot of people on this group have said its an issue. Whether or not
its a problem; how big the problem is and why its not possible to talk
about the problem without being attacked are what normally get
debated.

Fod

Brimstone yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

Toomy appears to be too stupid to read the part where I point out that
CO2 is not a significant issue for transport. Nor indeed is CO2 being
tackled responsibly or even coherently by government.

Nor indeed am I sure that CO2 *is* a problem.

Climate change is a fact that I have never denied, the cause of climate
change or indeed concerns that climate change is only headed in one
direction, is something I have questioned, often.

Again "Toomy" appears to believe that he has discovered something
devastating when it is "business as usual".

Tommy wrote:

Why? A vain attempt to bolster your ego?

I don't think, and your re-posting doesn't show it either, that SF has
ever said CO2 is a problem or issue for transport. What he has done is
comment on ways of reducing enissions of it that would be far more
beneficial than the empty rhetoric and guff spouted by 'Green
Campaigners' who appear to have no real clue as to what they campaign
about and have even less clue about how to tackle it in a coherent and
cohesive manner.

He _has_ said there is Climate Change, but where he, and it seems most
level-headed people do have an issue is what's causing change, where the
change is going, and what we can do to stop it, if indeed we can or if
indeed we should. All these answers are still open for discussion as
NO-ONE KNOWS them yet.

On Oct 15, 12:02 pm, "Tommy" mal.com> wrote:

Depends which particular issue you're referring to, Tommy.

Tommy wrote:

And what makes your opinion more valid than his or anyone else's?

If you're happy being one of the knee-jerking sheep that's happy to be
dragged along behind the latest band-wagon that's being driven by a load of
panicing, paranoid promoters of some passing fancy then that's OK by me.
Just don't expect those capable of thought to join with you or agree with
you. At least until after they've got some evidence and properly considered
it.

Brimstone yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

Actually I'd be much happier if you realised that Toomy is telling lies
(again). He takes comments made in one context and then froths at the
mouth about the comment, but positions the comment against his own
made-up drivel about a different issue.

I have not taken the position that Global warming or CO2 emissions are
an non-issue, I have taken the position that the current GW "debate" is
largely a matter of religion, absent of evidence and that where that
evidence is produced it is subject to alternative interpretation.

Steve Firth (%%steve%%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth)) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying:

It's a religion. Same as any other.