Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/04/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I really didn't want to jump into this...but... > To whoever said that CO2 levels are not measurably higher, look at any of > the research, freely available on the web: atmospheric CO2 concentration > has gone from 300ppm to 380ppm in the last century. Are you a scientist? Do you understand scientific testing and testing principles? Do you know that so many years ago that their measurements were accurate, and do you have all the test data to examine the test for anomalies, or possible causes of inaccurate results? I am not saying your information is or isn't right. I am saying that without proper substantiation, an (how old?) old test can hardly be touted as accurate, much less scientific. How can you do CO2 tests in the exact same conditions, years later...the winds, the temperature everything atmospheric will have some bearing on the tests. Problem is, people can do/interpret tests to mean what THEY want them to mean. It's a game. I find this kind of stuff entirely funny. We KNOW that camera testing is done with an EXTREME bias, in most cases, but amazing how some people want to believe, without questions, tests that support THEIR point of view.