maybe it's just me, but I could have sworn it said "hurricanes" not extreme weather. And the question asked was would the US reconsider the Kyoto accords based on hurricanes. My answer is and remains "no." Not based on hurricanes. Patterns of extreme weather is a different topic.

it doesn't matter that it said hurricanes. It is all part of the same topic. Are four hurricanes hitting the one state an example of extreme weather? I'd say so. Logically then if I see an example of extreme weather like this, knowing what I know about the rates of extreme weather it makes me think that the greenhouse effect is on the rise.

The question was would the IS reconsider its stance because of recent hurricanes. Yes that was the question. Thanks for pointing it out to me, like I can't read. Where however does it say to look at events in isolation? Nobody in their right mind, least of all Mierin would thinkt hat just one instance -or four here, but you see my point- would a case make. Do you really think that Mierin's whole case for a greenhouse effect and the benefits of Kyoto rested totally on hurricanes?


wads

Onwards the Aussie Spam Invasion!
TwoWongs rocks my world
campaiging for vitamin S
Quai Master is my muffin