Talk:Climate cycles
Violates NPOV. I support AGW theory but this is too much. Currently cleaning up. --Scientist 19:02, 26 September 2007 (EDT)
Brief rewrite completed. I'm going to adopt this page and attempt to improve it. I shall begin plotting some graphs of temperature over the past 400,000 years using data from Vostok. --Scientist 19:22, 26 September 2007 (EDT)
- Whoa, thank you, Scientist. It was pretty over the top before. Also a technical note, there is no NPOV policy here, but I think you did the right (heh, punny) thing here. HelpJazz 19:24, 26 September 2007 (EDT)
- No problem. I'm going to add a few lines around the middle summarising what AGW theory says; I hope that it doesn't appear too liberal once it's done.
- I may be a liberal but I know that Conservapedia is, obviously, dominated by conservatives.
- --Scientist 19:31, 26 September 2007 (EDT)
I forgot about Creationist beliefs, so I put in 'tens of thousands of years'. This has been edited by TK on the basis that this length of time cannot be proven.
This leaves me in a tricky situation regarding the graph. The data goes back 400k years going by the time-scale scientists believe; however, in 6,000 years there has not been even one full climate cycle.
Any idea what I should do now? I could remove the time-scale from the graph.
--Scientist 20:33, 26 September 2007 (EDT)