Search results

Let me nip this in the bud in advance: RE: Vostok ice cores, please see: The Myth of Dangerous Human-Caused Climate Change R M Carter FIG 1 - Atmospheric carbon dioxide, temperature and methane levels for the last 420 000 years as reconstructed from the Vostok ice core, Antarctica (after...

I did.... I read through each of the cited examples at it's conclusion. The above link provided an excellent overview. However, if you prefer, I can find a number of unrelated studies from something like Google Scholar and make broad associations and let the reader connect the dots

Has this screen shot been peer-reviewed by multiple screen-shot experts?

This is how the data from the above references play out. According to the aforementioned research, the amount of the greenhouse effect that can be directly attributed to anthropogenic sources equates to approx. 0.28% if water vapor is considered in the equation and apporx. 5.53% if water vapor...

Start Here: I will provide an overview shortly. S.M. Freidenreich and V. Ramaswamy, Solar Radiation Absorption by Carbon Dioxide, Overlap with Water, and a Parameterization for General Circulation Models, Journal of Geophysical Research 98 (1993):7255-7264 Global Deception: The...

A denier!?... Please, oh please take it back… I promise that I won’t cross you and Suzuki ever again! Btw - Your references had no connection to the topic. (Relative measures) Scholarly debate or not, your initial references still didn’t have any relative connection. .. And yet...

A belief?.. Seriously?... The geological record doesn't lie Tonnington - I don't need a complex model supported by generous statistical assumptions to make that statement… You, on the other hand must rely on such to develop any traction whatsoever. Either refute the episodic periods of...

Oh, don't get your panties all in a bunch Anna... I guess cheap shots are all you have to offer to anything. You stick your foot in your mouth, challenge others' on top of it and then get all in a tizzy when you get schooled.

No changing the rules now... I have never opened myself up to the claim that I can pin-point the cause, let alone provide a model. I deliberately assumed a very generalized position that you had no objection towards. The initial foundation of my argument is that warming AND cooling have...

.... So, why did you even bring it up then? Finally learned to read then, eh? How fitting... The very mentality that has gotten you schooled on a few occasions now. Let's see.... Nutrition, vitamin intake, personal hygiene, health/lifestyle choices that impact overall health. Unless...

It was your example and opened itself to that exact style of response. Fair enough... That said, as a fledgling science, it is highly inappropriate to set global economic policy and global regulation considering that we are unclear on the issue. Sound fair? Learn to read already.. I have...

I forgot to mention: Nor are anthropogenic sources of GHG's (as far as my position is concerned). The point I made to Anna is intended to illustrate the real lack of (complete) understanding that we have in this area. To assess an over simplified cause-effect relationship (ie. hair length)...

Very well... I will be forwarding info that details the sources of natural CO2 and the relativity surrounding natural and anthropogenic sources.

The concept isn't that hard Anna - try looking at it this way. When your hair gets longer, does it occur solely because you cut it?.. Is that the solitary mechanism that is primarily responsible for for the hair growth?

As per your earlier concern, I’m happy to analyze your first 2 reference points. Let’s get started shall we? First, a quote from your previous post that represents a major flaw in your position: We don't know this - YOU don't know this either.... You need to rely on this...

That will be happening right now. In terms of your falsifiability requirement; I notice that you have no compunction in forwarding insultingly simplistic positions without regard for the infinitely dynamic system in which your 1 or 2 little components reside. Yeah... Tell me again about...

I made the terrible mistake of reading the opening page - moved onto the table of contents and was able to determine that it is an opinion piece. Seeing how the author supports his position in a manner that needs to employ emotionally charged talking points, relying on some ridiculous...

Have ya read the Table of Contents?.. It's pretty clear what the doc sets out to promote. I'm guessing that there isn't much that doesn't inspire "awe" for you, is there?8O

I read it... It appeared to represent an opinion more than anything else.

Fair eough.