Try answering the question. A simple "Yes" or "No" will do. Let's try it again... Are you part of Skeptical Science's "crusher crew" whose sole intent is to "drown out" those who do not accept their alarmist positions? Simple one word answer - Yes or No.
the chart shows that co2 lags the change in temperature. salbys study shows that change in ocean temps leads change in co2 level. which is consistent with the idea the ocean determines the co2 level.
How many time do I have to tell you dipshits. CO2 can both lead and lag temperature. What are you fucking stupid or something? Why don't you understand this? Republican?
you can keep lying without and support but the data shows co2 lags temps. why don't you back you bullshit up with some science. even your buddies at skeptical science don't attempt that baloney. they claim co2 amplfies warming after temps change. http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm and I just showed you salby uses the temperature record and shows co2 lags change in ocean temps... just about perfectly.
So, let's get one thing straight, Salby, like you, is an asshole. So of course you quote him. And second, rising CO2 levels lead temps higher. Do you know why? Because CO2 is a greenhouse gas, you idiot. You DO know what a greenhouse gas is right? Of course you don't. You are a particularly fucked up Republican.
If CO2 did not cause temps to rise, the earth would not have these large swings in temps. Because of the current CO2 levels, we are headed toward an 18 degree temperature increase. That's gonna suck. Like you. And don't forget, dickhead, CO2 levels act like the setting on a thermostat. You said that yourself.
2013 Hurricane Season Summary 2 Hurricanes - Neither above Category 1. 13 Named Storms Fewest hurricanes since 1982. Weakest season since 1950. Alarmists: "Global Warming is causing increasing and more severe storms that are going to devastate mankind". Mother Nature: "Bullshit. I'm the boss".