jc456
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2013
- 141,581
- 30,057
- 2,180
as soon as you provide the experiment, I'll read your links.Too funny... Your charts are perfectly aligned when a LOG function should not be due to its rate of diminishing return. So you out your self a liar and a fool all in one fail swoop....Well lets see if a newbie can figure it out.. Old Fraud and few others still cant figure it out... lets throw empirical evidence on your little alarmist parade..
Below are two rates of warming from the Hadcrut3 lower troposphere. One is from the period 1900 through 1950 and the the other is 1951 through 2000. Below each is the rate of warming.
The trend for the period 1900-1950 is 0.51 deg C or 0.103/decade
This trend occurred before CO2 became a rapidly increasing according to the IPCC/EPA and is near or is the Natural Variational rate.
The trend for 1951-2000 is 0.50 deg C or 0.100 deg C/decade.
Now this means that the two rates of warming are statistically insignificant DESPITE the rapid rise in CO2 and equal to NATURAL VARIATION..
So by simple observation we can see the problem with the hypothesis of runaway temp caused by CO2. During the time they claim runway rise it was nothing of the sort and even given the rise in CO2 there was no discernible increase in that natural rise.
So please show me where man has his finger prints on it...
Interesting charts. I have one, too.
As you can see the trends follow each other almost perfectly. Of course, both of our charts only address surface temps and everyone knows the oceans are a major part of this problem.
Here's a peer-reviewed and published study that confirms the link between carbon emissions and global warming:
Research confirms how global warming links to carbon emissions -- ScienceDaily
That's a great site if you're one that enjoys science. I'm not getting the impression you do though.
Isotope analysis has proven it's man. If you doubt that too then here's a link with links to many different studies that support that.
10 Indicators of a Human Fingerprint on Climate Change
Now back to this claim that someone it's saying it was the warmest in centuries. Let's just drop the pretense and acknowledge that was made up. With that out of the way, let's address the idea that because the planet has been warmer before man and before his greenhouse gas emissions that somehow proves he can't be involved in the current warming trend. It's faulty logic and we all know it.
Trying to shovel a pile of crap over on the public when simple science shows the lie..
I have to admit that you almost sounded like you knew what you were talking about. The broken English didn't help though.
Then you have never read hand written "scientist" notes, which goes to show that you have nothing on your plate but AGW cult propaganda..
I have and I have even written them, but that has nothing to do with anything.
You want links to studies? Here, I'll oblige:
Here are 522k of them. I look forward to your report on each one.
co2 global warming - Google Scholar
Remember, that ~97% of these studies that state a position for or against man's involvement are for it.