Quote:
Originally Posted by editec  The strong correlation between the rising amount of CO2 in the atmosphere in the last 150 years; coupled with the same correlation to the amount of CO2 that mankind has been slowing dumping into our atmosphere at the same time; PLUS the correlation of those two factors to the rising global temperatures in the last 150 years, does make a rather convincing argument that mankind's industrial activity and reliance on carbon based machines is at least partially the explanation for global warming.
I am open to arguments which refute this theory, but to date nobody has really made an argument which entirely negates it.
I would dearly love to discover that the manmade global problem theory is entirely wrong, (I like living in a heated home and driving a car as much as the next guy) but as yet I am unconvinced that one can completely dismiss that theory. |
What is so convincing aboout the man made theory? Surely you don't mean to suggest that two things happening at the same time is a scientifically convincing argument.
If that were the case then the fact that solar activity was also high during the same period should be equally convincing.
Co2 is a trace gas in the atmosphere, it makes up .0003% of the atmosphere so even if we have increased by third or half, that's less than a thousandth increase to the total atmosphere. And you are convinced to be the main drive in the temp increase, (which btw hasn;t increased in the last 7-10 years, I'd love to see the model that predicted that.)
Here is a little more about big bad CO2
NCPA - BA #256 - Who's Afraid of CO2?
Convincing?
What is so convincing about a movements spokesperson who refuses to debate the issue?
What is so convincing about a UN panel (the IPCC) that has been shown on record to have mislead people in their report?