I would expect the thirty five percent rise in CO2(a greenhouse gas), due to fossil fuel burning, would raise temps. How can you cannot understand this, or refuse to, is interesting. I think you're just troll.
fc is a brainless clown - I showed you to be a monkey and instead of getting smarter you now lie about my arguments... I never said co2 was not a greenhouse gas. I stated by definition it is. 2. Warming is not the issue... the earth warms in cycles. the question is... regardless of what man is doing, would we be warming anyway.
You didn't show shit. I did nothing to the chart. Check your meds. No we would not. The long term trend has been down up until the industrial revolution. If CO2 is a greenhouse gas and the levels are thirty five % higher, how would that NOT cause temps to rise ?
These numbnuts "science" morons are something else.. People that work on trading systems know that it takes a lot of data to expose the truth about a system. Science numbnuts have measurements from the last century or two and they have computer models that extrapolate that to a model of the entire globe's temperature over eons! Then they claim that their computer models should be taken far more seriously than weather models! We've gone from panic about global cooling to panic about global warming, now it seems like it might swing back to global cooling.. what can they do for an encore? Throw a tantrum and threaten to hold their breath till they die maybe? I don't set my hair on fire and run in circles telling everybody to panic for any science numbnuts...
That's right, you're supposed to provide it. That's what an answer does. So. Regarding the physical properties of the CO2 molecule... what's your answer to my question, yes or no?
One of the arguments against Mann's "hockey stick" graph was concerned his data derived from tree ring studies. Critics deemed it unreliable. Why is the same method reliable now?
There was never a "panic" about global cooling. This is only stated by those that have been brainwashed by the fossil fuel GW denial propaganda campaign. It was a minority opinion. Nothing like the vast scientific consensus about GW today. There is virtually no disagreement about the basics of GW among scientists and every science organization in the world also agree. And there is no indication of any swing back to global cooling. Again, the basic principles of GW are simple. CO2 is a greenhouse gas and levels have gone up 35% since we started burning fossil fuels. So of course along with them so have temps. If we keep burning them as we've been doing we face certain catastrophe within a few hundred years.
i have answered your question a dozen fricken times. arguendo... lets go with your assumption. so the heck what. lets call CO2 a blanket. you got a blanket on the floor the earth is your wife your wife can through the blanket in a blanket sink or she can throw it on you. if she throws the blanket on you... was it the blanket that caused the warming or your wife.
the point is the entire concept of man made global warming is conjecture. And I say that in a neutral manner. The conjecture may turn out to be correct. But lets stop calling it science.