Doug Hoffman wrote:
Rutan has an immense measure of credibility. He has spent his career
analyzing and making sense of large quantities of often conflicting
data. History has shown that he is very, very good at it. He also
has nothing, at least financial, to gain one way or the other.

Rutan is one of my heroes, and he has had a remarkable career as an
engineer and business man, but he has NO credibility as a climate
scientist.


How many of us here do (rhetorical question)? So it seems you would
suggest that (perhaps) all of us here cannot talk intelligently about
GCC. Got it. Thanks for the response.
Nonsense. Many are already talking intelligently about it, because they
know their limitations and proceed cautiously, trying to learn about it
instead of refute it. Rutan is not in that group. Have you read his Dec
2009 presentation? There is one sentence that is enough in error that
reading further is almost pointless. From page 3:

"Also, the GHG warming effect is primarily driven by water vapor, not by
CO2, and the human emissions’ portion of atmospheric CO2 is tiny."

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly