Well if that ain't some good data to support Bovine Flatulence Global Warming theory, I don't know what is! ![Roll Eyes ::)](http://outdoorwoodfurnaceinfo.com/forum/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
Again, this post is senseless.
You seem to indicate that we don't really have a more sophisticated understanding of our climate now than we did in the times of the Roman empire. Surely you don't believe that... Neal
Senseless?... uh,, no. A little silly? ... perhaps. But perhaps you are not making the connection.
The reference is this: the U.S. Federal government has spent an excessive amount of U.S. taxpayer cash on the study of the environmental impact of methane
directly sourced from bovine flatulence on the planet and its impact on the pseudo-claim of global warming. Pardon my language but the studies and the bovine anus has 1 thing in common: they are both full of *&$t (no study needed for determination).
Sophistication understanding? No. Scientific understanding? Yes. But as much with my beloved science, much cannot be detected through scientific methodology (e.g. slice a human cadaver into as many thin slies as a meat slicer can and I doubt you will ever "find" the human soul).
As a scientist (chemist actually), my lack of belief in any of the so-called data you are presenting on global warming is based on estimates (fancy name for educated
guessing) is that you want to extrapolate 20, 50, 100, whatever years of data (post-discovery of precise and accurate temperature-measuring devices) as an isolated phenomenon (problem; issue; man is killing the earth; yada, yada, yada) when the millions of years old mother Earth lifecycle is 1,000,000s+ percent longer than the data study or a human's lifecycle to measure it. In reality, it means little to nothing. The earth is doing just fine without spending money to "save it" from the global warming non-issue.
![Wink ;)](http://outdoorwoodfurnaceinfo.com/forum/Smileys/default/wink.gif)