Excessive CO2 doesn't rain out. It doesn't disappear. It stays in the atmosphere, floating around for decades or centuries.
Should have read your post first -- your description is more extensive than my short little blurb. I just don't have the energy to bother illustrating any level of detail anymore.
Yeah, you need to get decent sources, and you need to understand that a crap site stating that "America' had "record lows" has little to do with the global average temperature.
How many times are you going to pull the same stunt? Simply saying that the Earth is warming does not prove MMGW. As noted before the Earth's climate is always warming or cooling so you have 50% of being right. Second of all. Since you claim 2009 is the second hottest year, what year was the hottest? Since we are continuing to burn fossil fuels it means that there should have been more CO2 in the atmosphere in 2009 than during any other year. With that being the case why was 2009 not the hottest? It probably has something to do with CO2 being a LAGGING indicator. The same questions are being asked and you continue to fail to provide a reasoned response.
Nope. That's wrong on multiple levels. Hopefully dcraig will tell you. (Facepalm) Why wasn't 2009 the hottest? Because we don't have temperature stations for every molecule in the atmosphere. Also, there are these things called "oceans" which store and release heat throughout their massive depths. You may have heard of "oceans" from such movies as "Oceans 11," "Pirates of the Caribbean", "Jaws II" and Disney's classic children's movie "Nemo."
co2 concentrations move in a curve. Seasonal variations in photosynthesis show up in this curve, even influences such as day and night can be seen. The Great Depression's 30% drop was invisible.
It is correct on multiple levels. Neither you, nor dcraig can make any argument for MMGW that even comes close to being considered scientific proof. Once again Dave, making the the argument that it got warmer so MMGW is a valid theory is absolute rubbish. (Facepalm) Great, well why exactly would an ocean store or release more heat from one year to the next? According to your theory how does more CO2 lead to cooler temps? BTW, I notice you are still using your computer which will cause the release of greenhouse gases. I notice you are still polluting BigDaveDiode. It highlights exactly how full of shit you are. Nicely done.
So when you tip a balanced teeter-totter, does it immediately right itself? Of course it doesn't. At best it will oscillate.
That is exactly what happens. Now you need to get off your duff and start reading why that is. It's been posted here a dozen times, now you have to do your own work. Yeah, that sentence just came off as crazy. Good point: 1) There is no power except CO2 polluting power (I'm on hydro, if you're interested) 2) Because we recognize the science, we all share the same conclusions on how to solve a scientific problem. 3) If someone does anything contrary to their argument, their argument is rendered false even though actions have no bearing on the argument and the evidence itself 4) People emit any pollution have to be pro-pollution. Given the severe analytical errors in your posts you have posted no evidence that you are able to think logically.
You made the claim. The burden of proof is on you. You seem to know, but your heroes at CRU don't seem to know. On Oct 14, 2009, at 10:17 AM, Kevin Trenberth wrote: " Hi Tom How come you do not agree with a statement that says we are no where close to knowing where energy is going or whether clouds are changing to make the planet brighter. We are not close to balancing the energy budget. The fact that we can not account for what is happening in the climate system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless as we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not! It is a travesty! Kevin" So the fraudsters at CRU don't even claim to know, but BigDaveDiode, a failed trader posting on an internet forum from his mom's basement knows. Now we know for sure you are talking out of your ass Dave. You made the assertion, not me. 1. So your computer was manufactured with zero CO2 emissions. There were also no emissions to get it from the factory to your home. Interesting. 2. If the science is correct, then there really is only one way to solve the problem. The solution does not include adding more CO2 to the environment which your are doing. 3. It has nothing to do with whether the are argument is correct or not. It has to do with being a hypocrite. 4. ????? I have no idea what to even make of this. To top it off, you ignored half of my post so I will nail you on it again. Neither you, nor dcraig can make any argument for MMGW that even comes close to being considered scientific proof. Once again Dave, making the the argument that it got warmer so MMGW is a valid theory is absolute rubbish.