Yeah really. And how bout that singed toe guy. He doesn't believe in AGW so he's not going to look at any evidence that may counter his opinion. Classic right wing ignorant, dogmatic narrow-mindedness on display right there. They would rather be wrong than proved wrong. Such fragile egos they must have.
Start taking a daily megadose of resveratrol. You may make it to 150. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9920994/Pill-to-live-to-150.html http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/resveratrol-supplements
I see peil's argument as a variation of jem's: Historically, fire lags lightning. Therefore Man cannot cause heat.
Nothing is wrong with the premise, it is the conclusion that makes for a faultily constructed syllogism. Here is the logically correct construction of a syllogism using your premise: I observed myself 20,000 times over the course of my life, and each time I did this, I didnt die. Therefore I can conclude with a high degree of certainty that the act of self observation cannot cause my death (Although he act of a third party -such as a partner - observing you every day for while might induce his or her suicide.)
ricter is despise it when you leftist mis state our arguments on purpose. here is my argument... for about a year now you are routinely writing like an asshole so with a reasonable degree of certainty you must be an asshole. that is my argument. --- My real argument is that you have not shown CO2 to cause warming on earth... ever, with any science or observation. The observations show CO2 lags temperature. Therefore there is no way you can assert show man made CO2 causes warming on earth. and if you were really logical you would understand.. if fire always lags lighting... (as co2 has always lagged temps) you would need some (proof) science to show fire causes lighting. obviously you are too leftist to actually discuss the science or even show integrity on this issue.
There certainly IS proof that increasing CO2 leads to increasing temperatures. Not to mention a logical presumption based upon our knowledge of how CO2 in the atmosphere works. But asking the moron deniers to use logic is too much to ask for.