- Thread starter
- #761
However, causation will always exhibit correlation. You deniers get a line like yours in your head and you seem to believe that correlation is evidence against causation. And there is a GREAT deal more than simple correlation behind AGW. If you want to deny AGW, you need to explain what happens to the IR energy that the absorption spectrum of CO2 shows will be absorbed by the gas, as well as the multitude of laboratory experiments showing it doing precisely that and the data both from the ground and space showing IR backscatter and changes to LWIR escaping to space.That’s nice. The last eccentricity cycle was nearly circular, so there was no orbital forcing to trigger a glacial cycle or cooling. You have falsely attributed a natural variation - of which the geologic record is littered with - to CO2. Correlation does not equal causation.
You'll have to point to me where I - or anyone with reasonable knowledge of the subject - has every indicated that CO2 is the only factor controlling the Earth's temperature. I would also like to see a quote or a graphic that shows the precise point in time you keep talking about. Just a time, that's all I need. I can find my own data.We know this because it was 2C warmer in the past with 120 ppm less atmospheric CO2 than today. If what you claim is true it should be warmer than the last interglacial cycle because there is more atmospheric CO2 today.