While we were chatting the following reasonable language has been put into the article which Ed has not reverted:
SEPP (or Fred Singer) has also commented on the question of [[Ozone depletion]], incorrectly asserting that the statement "CFCs with lifetimes of decades and longer become well-mixed in the atmosphere, percolate into the stratosphere, and there release chlorine." is controversial [http://www.sepp.org/ozone/ozonefranklin.html].
Fred
From: "Tim the Enchanter" t-money@thehouse.ws Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 16:15:00 -0600 To: "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] William Connelley no longer neutral contributor (Re: toJimbo)
I would say the answer to that is no. You could go to a library and look up GW and you would find numerous books on either side of the argument. You could do the same thing with a search on Google or a similar site and the results would be the same however, considering the nature of the internet, you might not consider that ample proof one way or the other. I think Ed's suggestion of making Dr. Connelly a source would be the best way to handle it.
[[User:T-Money]]
----- Original Message ----- From: "Allan Crossman" a.crossman@blueyonder.co.uk To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 3:39 PM Subject: [WikiEN-l] William Connelley no longer neutral contributor (Re: toJimbo)
Here the question is - does nearly every expert in whatever field "global warming" falls under (environmental science, or whatever) accept William Connolley's claim? I don't know yet.
-- Allan Crossman - http://dogma.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk PGP keys - 0x06C4BCCA (new) || 0xCEC9FAE1 (compatible)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l