Fair points, and you are probably right about Kop's post, but I would only have repeated it as a sound bite in the pub.
I understand how you made your assumptions, but I know that in Bali recently there were a number of scientists in agreement with the article, which is why I took the 'some commentators' point as gospel.
I heard something on Radio 2 about it. I don't recall names, but it was David Bellamy (not the greatest scientific mind ever I know) who was actually interviewed. I subsequently posted a link on here with some of the theory behind it:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0509084556.htm
This might be incorrect, but it shows how the science is incomplete & yet huge assumptions are being made.
I am not totally disregarding the NASA findings (or any of the others). What I am saying is that you can't make your assessments by taking a range of figures from different places which will then fit your argument. You need to use consistent data.