don't think so, (the main point being that over 500
scientist had published works rebutting at least one
and sometimes more of the contentions commonly out
there for man-made global warming and to me at least
that means disagreement and lack of concensus)but glad
it got you out of lurking. you interpret it anyway you
want. i like you expressing your opinion and being out
of lurking. 
my time is up again. sure will be glad to get back my
own internet connection. 

i have started a responce to one of yours that is in
draft as it is sort of a long one typing wise. i'll
get it to you all soon i guess. even after i get the
connection it will be a while before i can get to not
limiting my time as i am trying to help unpack and get
a normal household back. 

--- Peter Hunsberger <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> On 9/18/07, ken barber <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > you are very welcome to your opinion of mr singer.
> but
> > it does not automatically go down the line.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I won't object to you posting
> Mr. Singers
> propaganda here.  What I will object to (and what
> lured me out of
> lurking) is:
> 
> 1) attempting to treat Mr. Singers position as
> having any scientific
> authority or accuracy;
> 
> 2) misconstruing the contents of any article to say
> the exact opposite
> of what is says in reality.
> 
> As far as I can tell your original post did both.
> 
> -- 
> Peter Hunsberger
> 
> -----------------------
> 
> To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY
> list, go here:
> 
>
http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy
> 



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/ 

-----------------------

To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:

http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy