The Warmer's Hypothesis

[konradv]

Well, you said that " that CO2 IS a driver of climate" and that's never happened, not even once on Earth. Moreover, it fails every lab experiment when you only add 500PPM of CO2, so they hypothesis fails.

You're wrong on both counts. High CO2 levels have led to higher temps many times in earth's history. Sometimes there are other major influences that could lower temps, hence the need to "hide the decline" from diverse sources to winnow out the contribution of CO2.

Wrong again, Buckwheat...Higher CO2 concentrations have followed the higher temperatures many times in the Earf's history.

This is a verified scientific fact, that you doomsday cultists continue to ignore in lieu of your misanthropic climatic Armageddon fable.

They've done BOTH, which you conveniently ignore. When it didn't, there were other factors involved, but that says NOTHING about the basic properties of CO2. We KNOW it can absorb IR and then re-emit radiation back towards earth, effectively slowing the loss of energy to space.

 

[Oddball]

No, the trend is that CO2 concentrations have followed ambient global temp increases...This is true and you know it, because it is a fact.

 

[konradv]

No, the trend is that CO2 concentrations have followed ambient global temp increases...This is true and you know it, because it is a fact.

I know you try to treat it as fact by cherry-picking those eras when high CO2 and lower temps were the norm, but ignore the other reasons for lowered temps. Kind of hypocritical, because that's what the skeptics always say the believers are doing regarding higher temps.