Let's throw open global warming debate

What I do agree with is his view that serious scientific discussion on the topic is needed. My plea is that such discussion should be published. My point about blogging sites is that these sites have become the sole areas where any non-standard views are discussed. This does not mean that I support them or the views expressed in them.

The Wikipedia website on paleoclimatology, for instance, examines the close relationship between solar radiation intensity and past sudden temperature and CO2/CH4 rises that took place long before significant human population, let alone manufacturing industry, existed.

Why are the falls so much slower than the rises? Its sources are near to impeccable and the queries that its data (and the relationship between CO2 and H2O absorption bands reiterated by John Cooknell in BSj 06/07) raises deserve more than the “Go away, little man” reaction of so many accepted experts.

I also agree that nature or science magazines are the most suitable forum, but what is the likelihood of an obscure engineer’s queries being published? In this sense, Godfrey Whitehouse’s “proper arena” is failing us, which is why I went into print in the first place.