The debate, of course, is not about whether climate is changing, but: (1) to what degree it is changing; (2) whether human activity is driving it; (3) whether climate change is adverse on a net basis; and, finally, (4) what, if anything, could be reasonably done about any potential adverse consequences.
Bravo Corey! Got it in one! ha ha
There’s a future for you in “science”.
I believe you understand completely!
That’s not how it works when you argue from conclusion…
Conclusion: The world is warming due to CO2
Fact: CO2 has been increasing over the last 16 years.
Assertion: This proves our conclusion.
Fact: Temperatures have been flat over the last 16 years.
Assertion: This is misleading and unimportant because we know our conclusion is correct. Just ignore/hide it.
McMartin appears to incapable of logic training. He is, however, really, really good at name-calling, bullying and not understanding science. Of course, anyone who disagrees with such “facts” does not understand that science is God, there are no theories, only revelations from those on high, and you can guess where those who disagree are sent…….
People with any scientific literacy know that climate changes. I am ready to question whether the climate changes we’ve been told have occurred over the last hundred years have, in fact, occurred. The AGW team have manipulated, cherry-picked and fabricated data and they have compared the MacIntoshes of recent thermometer records to the Granny Smiths of earlier thermometer records to the kumquats of thermometer proxies like tree rings. The evidence that global temps have changed in the Industrial Age is highly questionable and the idea that temps have changed significantly over the last fifty years is more doubtful yet.
Assertion: The world is warming due to CO2.
Fact: CO2 has been increasing over the last 16 years.
Fact: Temperatures have been flat over the last 16 years.
Assertion: Temperatures had stasis during times before the massive increase in CO2.
Question So what? Am I the only one to see that McMartin needs logic training?