CO2 levels higher than any time in last 800,000 years

Yes....that and the molten core of the earth which causes volcanic eruptions (which by the way spew billions of tons of "green house gases" into the atmosphere with every eruption) that dwarf mans polluting.
Read a book once in a while and stay away from government charts!

 

..all speculative, 'computer models,' & agenda driven 'extrapolation'. There is NOTHING driven by science. You may believe it to be so, but that is not science. That is belief, & the AGW disciples are as zealous for their religion as any other.

So you assert, with another reference to the poster, & not facts or evidence.

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. ~Christopher Hitchens

Your responses in the last couple of pages are all directed at the motives, intelligence, or something about the POSTERS, not science.. not evidence. Not facts. This is ad hominem debating, & that is mostly all the AGW followers have. There certainly isn't any science.. just assertions, threats of eternal hell fire, & logical fallacies. You only BELIEVE, very strongly, that global warming is an imminent threat to humanity. But the evidence is sketchy at best, & full of holes. Certainly, humans should be responsible with their environment, & our collective processes should guard against those who would exploit the planet to dominate or control others. But i see AGW as being right in there with the other manipulators & scoundrels with an agenda. People like Al Gore & hordes of others have used scare tactics to make themselves rich off the labors of others. Solyndra types have gamed the system to fleece the working man, & plunder the treasury. And the AGW backed politicians have been the enablers.. they have been complicit with this scam. Too many people have a vested interest in the outcome.. or, they have a collectivist agenda, to promote some utopian fantasy for total human control.

But regardless of the motives of the gamers, the bottom line is that the theory about global warming has little to no real science behind it. It is mostly computer models, not hard data. And how can there be? You may claim to 'know' the temps of the earth 1000, or 1,000,000 years ago, but it is impossible. The 'best guess' scenarios based on models, ice cores, & other extrapolations are fraught with assumptions & unknowns. This is not something to declare as 'settled science'. It is not even science, much less settled.

But i'm sure facts & evidence have little sway on people's religious opinions. They believe what they want to believe, based on fear, indoctrination, & the worship of the High Priests of the religion. The proliferation of the AGW dogma is a tragic commentary at how our educational system has become a tool for indoctrination, not a pathway to enlightenment & discovery.

 

The greatest scientific minds from all over the planet disagree with you. You are being used by fossil fuel interests

 

look, what you are REALLY saying here is that you don't know much about the issue.

if you know how to find forums like this, please use your intelligence. And google. Also, i would suggest you read books written by scientists if you are interested in this issue.

You should be able to find some basic facts re causes of variation in earth's climate without too much trouble.

Re government charts .... if you think data presented by reputable science agencies is questionable, you sound like a conspiracy theorist.

Not much more can be said on that.

 

I

again, all i am seeing is assertions based on opinion, not the science.

fyi, i have been debating this issue on forums such as these for years now, and while i used to present well referenced data, over time i found that denialists were not interested in facts. Now, i recognise them for what they are and don't do homework for them. Most are quite capable of finding the same information as me.

Climate science is not religion. In addition, there is a significant body of evidence from many scientific disciplines supporting the claims made by climate scientists. Over the last thirty years knowledge in all related fields has increased considerably.

the denialist camp however keep trotting out the same old information, occasionally repackaging it to make it appear new. They don't rely on science, and many of the people who use this information don't seem to have the slightest understanding science.

quite frankly, i am sick of having people ignorant of science telling me how tens of thousands of scientists are either in on a global conspiracy or hoodwinked by leftists.

 

exactly.

Good strategy. Propaganda is always more effective than logic. another point for a slur label.. 'denialist' is very scientific.

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. ~Christopher Hitchens

..another point for ad hominem! How do you 'trot out' non information? There is NO evidence of AGW, it is spurious, manufactured, extrapolated, computer models.. there is no data. You do not have scientifically verifiable information about the earth's temps or CO2 levels for the last million years or so.. that is projected, imagined, & fabricated. I dispute the claim. I do not have to provide evidence that disputes it, it is up to the claimant to prove theirs, not mine to disprove their imaginary friend.

Another ad hominem shot! That is really all you have. There is no data. No compelling science. No reason or logic. It is imagined hysteria, with threats of hell fire & doom. It is a religious belief, complete with high priests, eternal torment, & prophets of doom. Toss in a few scientific sounding words, get others on board based on IDEOLOGICAL loyalty, & you have all the look & feel of a religion.

Why have ALL the predictions from the global warming camp been wrong? Because they were based on FLAWED science & faulty models. The ice caps did not melt, & flood the coastal cities, if you hadn't noticed. We have not been plunged into a greenhouse canopy. NONE of the doom & gloom predictions came to pass, or are coming to pass, or will come to pass, given the track record of the predictors. So, if the predictions are all wrong, do we question the assumptions & 'data' of the predictors? Of course not!! just double down on stupid & repeat the same things over & over & hope people are gullible enough to believe it. ..add to that some good state mandated indoctrination, & the propaganda machine is running fine.

 

So gases in Earth's atmosphere do not trap heat from the sun, contributing to a significantly warmer surface temperature?

 

You have an 'argument of authority', with no evidence. That is not science. That is dogma.

 

I have tons of evidence. Nasa AGW evidence page. And I have the greatest scientific minds on the planet. And that is science. But you do have your cartoons. LOL

 

Your 'evidence' is a propaganda site? computer generated data? Speculation & conjecture? the only response for that kind of 'evidence' IS cartoons..

- - - Updated - - -

Show me. Show me ONE scientific study, with data, that COMPELS the conclusion of AGW.

I'll wait.

 

Feel free to choose any of them from the NASA AGW evidence page. But you won't like them because they don't give you the answer your fossil fuel overlords approve of. All hail Exxon

 

To the contrary. Greenhouse gases actually cool the earth, blocking the suns radiation. Google Tambora. The earth cooled...it didn't warm.

 

I'm not talking about the ash particles in the upper atmosphere from volcanoes that cool climate for only a few years. I'm asking about the H2O, CO2, CH4, N2O, an other trace gases that have kept Earth about 33 °C above its effective temperature for millions of years.

 

How do you know what the earths "effective temperature" is?

 

You measure the amount of radiation Earth receives from the sun, how much it emits back into space, then apply some physics and mathematics.

http://www.atmos.washington.edu/2001Q1/211/notes_for_011001_lecture.html

 

..then flip a coin, or guess. The answer to either is just as 'scientific' as the other. Computer models are not 'empirical data'. They are speculation, guess work, & agenda driven opinion. They do violence to the scientific method with their political propaganda masquerading as science. It is a tragedy for mankind, is contrary to the principles from the Age of Reason & the Enlightenment, & drive us back to the dark ages with state mandated beliefs as the 'official' science of the elite.


Show me. Show me ONE scientific study, with data, that COMPELS the conclusion of AGW.

I'll wait.

 

So no evidence. No studies. No data. Just assertions & threats of eternal hell fire.

Can you not see that you are arguing for propaganda? Do you know what science is? It is a method for discover of the world around us, not a vehicle for indoctrination.

One study that compels the conclusion.. with REAL data & compelling reason behind it... not assertions or bluff, or authoritarian double speak. You cannot produce one, because none have been made. All we have are speculative OPINIONS from people with an agenda, not hard science.

 

I hear the politicans. Lord knows they talk and talk.

But not even the politicians agree. How can this be enorsed as truth by one party yet the other party is waiting for proof.

Keep in mind, we were warned during the Clinton era how bad it will be right now. Rather than bad, we have had a lot of rain, our reservoirs are full, the state releases vast waters, part of the US is in a cold freeze, etc and etc. But we are told to believe global warming is a problem for the USA.

I point to China and India but Democrats want no part of blaming them.

Who elected America to take all the blame?

 

Lots of studies with real data. Science not the wacky conspiracy theories you have. Lol

 

Here you go. I look forward to your detailed analysis of this work.

http://warming.sdsu.edu/arrhenius_paper_1896.pdf

 

what did they use to determine CO2 levels 800,000 years ago? Ice Core samples?

Climate Change: Incorrect information on pre-industrial CO2
http://www.john-daly.com/zjiceco2.htm

 

You linked to Jaworowski's nonsense. He's yet another denier crank who has been babbling about the oncoming ice age for decades. His ice core theories are contradicted by the evidence, so everyone laughs at them.

So as usual, it's godawful science, but deniers still believe it entirely on faith, because it tells them what they want to hear. There's a long detailed debunking of him here, if anyone cares.

http://web.archive.org/web/20090104033735/http://www.someareboojums.org/blog/?p=7

 

The stratospheric cooling, the increase in backradiation, and the decrease in outgoing longwave radiation in the GHG bands all compel that conclusion. Those are smoking guns for greenhouse-gas caused global warming. No models are involved there, just direct observation.

And if you're unfamiliar with those topics, you lack the basic scientific knowledge necessary to participate in the discussion.

Now, let's talk about how science works. In science, the theory that best explains the observed evidence is the theory that will be accepted. Global warming theory best explains all of the observed evidence, hence it is the accepted theory. Your theory explains nothing, because you don't even have one.

If you want to replace the current theory, you need to come up with something that better explains all of the observed evidence. We'll wait for you to put one forth. Note that any "It's a natural cycle!" theory is contradicted by the observed evidence, and thus has to be wrong.

 

again, all i am seeing is that you are not aware of the scientific information on the issue.

i am also seeing that you are highly susceptible to propaganda, as evidenced by externally based content in your post.

i am only interested in the facts of climate change, not the politics.