# A Global Warming Thread for Jeg

**URL:** <https://forums.speedlife.net/t/a-global-warming-thread-for-jeg/23948>\
**Category:** NYSpeed Off Topic\
**Created:** [February 2, 2007, 5:15am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/a-global-warming-thread-for-jeg/23948 "2007-02-02T05:15:43Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 8

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Fry](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/fry/32/7284_2.png) [@Fry](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Fry)\
**Post date:** [February 2, 2007, 7:45am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/a-global-warming-thread-for-jeg/23948/8 "2007-02-02T07:45:07Z")

</div>

> [@JoesTypeS](#):
>
> The phrase “very likely” translates to a more than 90 percent certainty that global warming is caused by man’s burning of fossil fuels. That was the strongest conclusion to date, making it nearly impossible to say natural forces are to blame.

I read the article. It’s just that the whole assigning a number to a vague phrase thing seems awfully hokey. If one of my colleagues reported to me that “the plant was making pretty good oxygen, which is an improvement over last week’s good oxygen, and meets the customer’s minimum requirements of okay oxygen” I’d probably slap them.

I understand it’s probably just a way of spinning it to the public, but I prefer objectiveness (which is probably not a word) to spin. But I’m sure I’m in the minority.

---

_[View the full topic](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/a-global-warming-thread-for-jeg/23948)._