>reader wrote:   
   >   
   >> Correction, it debunks nothing of the kind.  The   
   >   
   >Funny how it proved "Global Warming" but once I   
   >pointed out that it's saying the opposite it   
   >suddenly proves nothing...   
      
   Repeat, it says nothing of the kind; it was ablout using previous   
   interglacial ranges to estimate the current one.   
      
   They said *if* this interglacial was on track with the 3 most recent ones;   
   we are due for a change.   
      
   I mentioned that leaves out a vital bit, the same article spoke of the   
   current interglacial being warmer then the previous one with indications of   
   higher temperatures before it was over.   
      
   The articl I then posted spoke of this factor and the possible range of the   
   current interglacial based on previous ones of thee past 800k years.   
      
   It said based on expectedd greater temperature it would in fact exceed the   
   normal range of previous interglacer periodds of the 800k years.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)