OGM - "What utter nonsense. There are two types of species. One is a specialist, such as an aardvark, which eats a specific type of food and lives in a specific environment. The other is the generalist, who can eat most anything and live most anywhere. One reason our species is so successful is that we are generalists. We can eat a lot of dsifferent types of food, and move into a lot of difference niches. So to suggest that if I can't say what the optimum temperature for us is that that somehow negates global warming is a completely meaningless statement. We aren't the only species that habitates this planet. Not only that, but it is because there are so many of us and we are living in so many different environments, that global warming can and likely will so adversely affect us. And that is because climate change is affecting environments across the board, dude. And if it is affecting us so broadly, imagine what it must be doing to the specialists of the world. Gee, for an alleged biochemist, you sure don't see to know much about biology."
Palerider - Translation = one more claim you can't sbstantiate. What a surprise. And even when you are acknowledging that you can't substantiate your claims, you simply have to repeat the claims again. Talk about sad.
So you are telling the rest of us that you don't think that the very basic biological fact of specialists and generalists is real, either? Did you not attend biology 101 in college? Do you believe that we are the only species that inhabits this planet, or do you believe that we are the only species that counts (probably the latter, eh)?
If you can say what the "optimum" temperature is, let's see it, and then let's see you defend it. I'll give you a ballpark figure, though, one that you yourself have already posted in one of your graphics - 17 degrees C, which is the average global temperature for Earth going back to the Cambrian period. But so what?
