You claim the probable reason is for ease of understanding, without providing any support for that claim, or explanation for the change to something very different in meaning.
it was not a claim but a suggestion for your consideration ... you dismissed (does that make you a dismissive?) the suggestion by saying i had no supporting evidence and then continued with it had different meanings.
let's see .. i assumed you could think logically ... i may be wrong ... and i assumed you could think for yourself ... i could be wrong ... but then you may require that every single iota be included and you consider only the literal meaning of everything in which case you have to parse each iota individually and separately and reassemble to discover it's true meaning ... so if i understand correctly and if you are the person i have described then yes you are right ... they did not use the exact same words and may i also conclude by extension that any change in wording would also alter the meaning beyond recognition ... have i captured the essence of your thoughts???
may i suggest again, but suspect you will dismiss again, that if we poll a requisite number of people on the difference in meaning my guess is they will invariable agree the two statements mean essentially the same thing ... but go ahead and dismiss (you design the poll & questions and analyze and report back with the results)
explanation for word change ... really??? what are you the personal word police that everyone must pass your muster if a word is changed??? what about translated works? you think that the words will remain the same and perhaps the meanings may change? only the mathematics remains the same the words change ... geez
Your plodding over the fact that they are themselves involved with climate science, in some way, is only making the problem look worse.
the only problem is your lack of attention to reality ... any inherent design flaw is their problem and has nothing to do with climate change
It's got a crack, a bit worse than a surface blemish, but we'll see later...reading on.
LOL please convey your poll design analysis to the authors ... i am sure they would be most interested in your critique
are you a denier??? a dismissive?
