wrote in message
...

...or maybe he doesn't have any original research to present and is
just going to re-hash the usual Denialist bull****....


You don't think there is 100's of studies around the world that have found a
link between the sun and climate?

Here is a video for you that shows a connection to the sun....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85epBo_EVOI


Funding and participants include Government of British Columbia,
McMaster University, Carleton University, Queens University,
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmosphere sciences (CFCAS),
Ottawa-Carleton Geosciences center, University of Victoria, and
several more I failed to list).

The above explains how the small change in the sun can result is a larger
change on earth due to climate amplifiers...

And, if co2 was such a big driver, then why from 1940 to 1970 during the
HUGE industrial boom when all that co2 was being output was the tempatures
dropping?

And, why do we now see temperatures going down if co2 was such the huge main
big devil driver it made out to me?


Super Turtle

Green Turtle wrote:

wrote in message
...

...or maybe he doesn't have any original research to present and is
just going to re-hash the usual Denialist bull****....

The above explains how the small change in the sun can result is a larger
change on earth due to climate amplifiers...

Just how does this negate the greenhouse effect of the massive amounts
of CO2 humans are emitting and the huge global warming anomaly of the
last half century?

Are you saying you can only cope with the idea of one single factor
affecting climate changes?

And, if co2 was such a big driver, then why from 1940 to 1970 during the
HUGE industrial boom when all that co2 was being output was the tempatures
dropping?

Solar shading caused by particulate emission. Humans caused that and
humans fixed it by reducing particulate emissions.
Are you seriously admitting you didn't know that?

And, why do we now see temperatures going down if co2 was such the
huge main
big devil driver it made out to me?

We aren't seeing temperatures going down. You're quoting a denialist
fantasy.

On Jan 21, 1:30*am, wrote:
Green Turtle wrote:
wrote in message
....
...or maybe he doesn't have any original research to present and is
just going to re-hash the usual Denialist bull****....
The above explains how the small change in the sun can result is a larger
change on earth due to climate amplifiers...

Just how does this negate the greenhouse effect of the massive amounts
of CO2 humans are emitting and the huge global warming anomaly of the
last half century?

Are you saying you can only cope with the idea of one single factor
affecting climate changes?

And, if co2 was such a big driver, then why from 1940 to 1970 during the
HUGE industrial boom when all that co2 was being output was the tempatures
dropping?

Solar shading caused by particulate emission. Humans caused that and
humans fixed it by reducing particulate emissions.
Are you seriously admitting you didn't know that?

* And, why do we now see temperatures going down if co2 was such the
huge main

big devil driver it made out to me?

We aren't seeing temperatures going down. You're quoting a denialist
fantasy.

Just how does this negate the greenhouse effect of the massive
amounts
of CO2 humans are emitting and the huge global warming anomaly of
the
last half century?

I agree that humans are emitting large amounts of CO2.

BUT

The greenhouse effect, if it exists at all, is a weak effect which is
easily dominated by natural cycles like ENSO and PDO.

There is no huge global warming anomaly of the last half century. The
temperature record is questionable, and the current anomaly is smaller
than the error in the measurements.

On Jan 20, 5:44*am, Mr Right wrote:

Just how does this negate the greenhouse effect of the massive
amounts
of CO2 humans are emitting and the huge global warming anomaly of
the
last half century?

I agree that humans are emitting large amounts of CO2.

That may be so, but unfortunately irrelevant.

There is an 800 year lag between temperatures
and CO2.

The Medieval Warming Period (starting in 1000)
is causing an increase of CO2, and has been causing it
since 1800, even before the industrial revolution.

This fits the data much better than "humans
are causing CO2 increase". People who
say "humans are causing CO2 increase"
usually ignore the actual CO2 increase facts,
or just convince themselves because they
want to believe it.

["Unfortunately" irrelevant, because the CO2
is now going to start declining and going to
cause agriculture problems. If humans had
an impact on CO2, we could try to increase
the CO2 levels.]

Mr Right wrote:
On Jan 21, 1:30 am, wrote:
Green Turtle wrote:
wrote in message
...
...or maybe he doesn't have any original research to present and is
just going to re-hash the usual Denialist bull****....
The above explains how the small change in the sun can result is a
larger change on earth due to climate amplifiers...

Just how does this negate the greenhouse effect of the massive
amounts of CO2 humans are emitting and the huge global warming
anomaly of the last half century?

Are you saying you can only cope with the idea of one single factor
affecting climate changes?

And, if co2 was such a big driver, then why from 1940 to 1970
during the HUGE industrial boom when all that co2 was being output
was the tempatures dropping?

Solar shading caused by particulate emission. Humans caused that and
humans fixed it by reducing particulate emissions.
Are you seriously admitting you didn't know that?

And, why do we now see temperatures going down if co2 was such the
huge main

big devil driver it made out to me?

We aren't seeing temperatures going down. You're quoting a denialist
fantasy.

Just how does this negate the greenhouse effect of the massive
amounts
of CO2 humans are emitting and the huge global warming anomaly of
the
last half century?

I agree that humans are emitting large amounts of CO2.

BUT

The greenhouse effect, if it exists at all, is a weak effect which is
easily dominated by natural cycles like ENSO and PDO.

Not dominated in any way whatsoever.


There is no huge global warming anomaly of the last half century. The
temperature record is questionable, and the current anomaly is smaller
than the error in the measurements.

Made-up crap.

wrote:
On Jan 20, 5:44 am, Mr Right wrote:

Just how does this negate the greenhouse effect of the massive
amounts
of CO2 humans are emitting and the huge global warming anomaly of
the
last half century?

I agree that humans are emitting large amounts of CO2.

That may be so, but unfortunately irrelevant.

There is an 800 year lag between temperatures
and CO2.

The Medieval Warming Period (starting in 1000)
is causing an increase of CO2, and has been causing it
since 1800, even before the industrial revolution.

A completely insane lie.

On Jan 20, 10:46*am, "marcodbeast" wrote:
wrote:
On Jan 20, 5:44 am, Mr Right wrote:

Just how does this negate the greenhouse effect of the massive
amounts
of CO2 humans are emitting and the huge global warming anomaly of
the
last half century?

I agree that humans are emitting large amounts of CO2.

That may be so, but unfortunately irrelevant.

There is an 800 year lag between temperatures
and CO2.

The Medieval Warming Period (starting in 1000)
is causing an increase of CO2, and has been causing it
since 1800, even before the industrial revolution.

* A completely insane lie.

Which part is a lie?

1) There was no Medieval Warming Period?

2) There is no 800-year lag?

3) The industrial revolution was fully operational
in 1800 and lots of cars were spewing CO2?

4) CO2 increase did not start in 1800?

wrote:
On Jan 20, 10:46 am, "marcodbeast" wrote:
wrote:
On Jan 20, 5:44 am, Mr Right wrote:

Just how does this negate the greenhouse effect of the massive
amounts
of CO2 humans are emitting and the huge global warming anomaly of
the
last half century?

I agree that humans are emitting large amounts of CO2.

That may be so, but unfortunately irrelevant.

There is an 800 year lag between temperatures
and CO2.

The Medieval Warming Period (starting in 1000)
is causing an increase of CO2, and has been causing it
since 1800, even before the industrial revolution.

A completely insane lie.

Which part is a lie?

1) There was no Medieval Warming Period?

2) There is no 800-year lag?

3) The industrial revolution was fully operational
in 1800 and lots of cars were spewing CO2?

4) CO2 increase did not start in 1800?

Left one out, I see. Liars usually do. lol

wrote in message
...


Green Turtle wrote:

wrote in message
...

...or maybe he doesn't have any original research to present and is
just going to re-hash the usual Denialist bull****....

The above explains how the small change in the sun can result is a larger
change on earth due to climate amplifiers...

Just how does this negate the greenhouse effect of the massive amounts
of CO2 humans are emitting and the huge global warming anomaly of the
last half century?

You have a pretty werid view of massive amounts. In one year man is only
responsible for 3% of the co2 output. I would hardly call that massive. Lets
see, oxygen is about 18-20%, Nitrogoen in the 80% range. what is co2? Hum,
2%? Nope! Hum, 1%..nope! 1/10% ? nope, try 1/380th of a %. So, co2 is
0.0380% of the total! and of that we only putting out 3%. (I let you do the
math here as to how much that is in ppm's).

Furthermore you do realize that the heat co2 absords is on a Logarithmic
scale? In other words, doubling co2 does NOT doouble the heat it traps.
Furthermore you do realize that of well over 90% of the greenhouse effect is
from water vapor and other gases. The small percentage of heat leftover to
grab by co2 is rather very small. And, worse of that c02, 97% of it is NOT
ours!. So not only is a ridiculous to assert that man's is outputing massive
amounts of co2, it is even more fantastically silly to point out that the
amounts of heat leftover for man's co2 to trap is stupid. Simply stupid on
your part.

The science right now doesn't even show any of man's co2 being able to
effect and drive global wamring as claimed. You simply don't have a
scientific proof that man's co2 is driving the temperature right now, it's
simply a faith based belief on your part.


Are you saying you can only cope with the idea of one single factor
affecting climate changes?


Now where did I make such a silly conjecture? You mean this is the best of
your intellectual come back for a debate with me? Only someone who wears
diapers or perhapds is having a lower IQ due to one need to change thier
tampons at "that time" of the month would engage me in such a stupid and
ignorant line of argumentation. However I've kindly returned the favor and
in this paragraph and have fired right back at your with the kind of
igonrant type of arguing you are attempting with me here.

And, if co2 was such a big driver, then why from 1940 to 1970 during the
HUGE industrial boom when all that co2 was being output was the
tempatures
dropping?

Solar shading caused by particulate emission. Humans caused that and
humans fixed it by reducing particulate emissions.
Are you seriously admitting you didn't know that?


I think what you're lacking or failing to understand is about every 30 to 40
years over about 400+ years we've pretty much a temperature trend going one
way or the other for that 30-40 year time period. So, then again explain to
me why from the turn of the centry 1900 to 1940 we saw tempatures increasing
then?

And, why do we now see temperatures going down if co2 was such the
huge main
big devil driver it made out to me?

We aren't seeing temperatures going down. You're quoting a denialist
fantasy.

Nope, sorry, most temperature data shows we been in a cooling trend for the
last number of years. It's also important keep in mind that the ground
stations are not really the best temperature data set to use, and as much as
2/3 of these stations have been shut down since 1990, and they were mostly
rural, and that skews the data sets....

we getting colder right now.....


Super Turtle

"Green Turtle" wrote
You don't think there is 100's of studies around the world that have found
a link between the sun and climate?

There are certianly no legitimate ones in the scientific press that link
sunspots to recent climate change.