15 Feb 19
@wildgrass saidI never said natural causes can explain "all" global warming. Stop misquoting me.
Arguments can be specious but theories cannot.
Your alternative theory, that natural causes can explain all global warming phenomena, is demonstrably less accurate than the currently accepted one.
The absence of a correlation does not a theory debunk.
You are continually digressing away from the purpose of this thread. Prove your assertions with sea level rise. All you are doing is spreading unproven gossip.
15 Feb 19
@humy saidMy assertion is there is a lack of evidence and there is. You have never proven there is evidence of your assertion. You are repeating false gossip. That is all you are capable of.
You keep make assertions without evidence like this one. We can then validly dismiss them. How do you KNOW there is "no evidence" of this when you have repeatedly shown ignorance of the relevant sciences that imply there is evidence? Who do you expect we will believe? Your opinion, given you clearly are NOT an expert on it? Or the relevant science and the relevant scientists that disagree with you? You will convince nobody here.
15 Feb 19
@metal-brain saidSince it's a valid theory then we don't need to prove it again using your weird correlative analysis.
I never said natural causes can explain "all" global warming. Stop misquoting me.
You are continually digressing away from the purpose of this thread. Prove your assertions with sea level rise. All you are doing is spreading unproven gossip.
@wildgrass saidYou can call it whatever you want. Nobody knows CO2 is the main cause of the warming or even contributing much to it. It is just an educated guess. You cannot prove it with certainty. What you have is faith. You can't even rule out methane as being the actual main cause so a carbon tax would be very ineffective if that is the case.
Since it's a valid theory then we don't need to prove it again using your weird correlative analysis.
You and humy both are making false assertions to avoid confronting the sea level issue. If you cannot prove it with that you never will and you all know it.
This thread is about sea level rise! You are all cowards and liars!
15 Feb 19
@metal-brain saidI know right. It's almost like small amounts of important things can cause large problems. I've never heard of that before.
Carbon dioxide — 0.04 percent
https://www.space.com/17683-earth-atmosphere.html
0.04 % is your bogey man? Absurd!
16 Feb 19
@wildgrass saidWe all know you have heard it. It is based on the belief of a backwards cause and effect. In other words, gossip that is outright false.
I know right. It's almost like small amounts of important things can cause large problems. I've never heard of that before.
Are you even going to try to show AGW with sea level?
16 Feb 19
@Metal-Brain
It matters little what data we spot here, you just dis it, fake news, totally unsubstantiated and so forth. So what good does it do to put any proof here?
17 Feb 19
@sonhouse saidData doesn't matter?
@Metal-Brain
It matters little what data we spot here, you just dis it, fake news, totally unsubstantiated and so forth. So what good does it do to put any proof here?
Interesting position.
17 Feb 19
@Metal-Brain
It doesn't matter to you when it refutes your ridiculous theories based on 90 year old dudes ignoring newer science.
17 Feb 19
@sonhouse saidExample?
@Metal-Brain
It doesn't matter to you when it refutes your ridiculous theories based on 90 year old dudes ignoring newer science.
@sonhouse saidYou mean me rejecting the heat island effect? Why do you think the heat island effect is relevant temp data? It is not. That is why sea level data is best to look at. No heat island BS.
@Metal-Brain
We've been down this merrygoround before, you know what I am talking about.
18 Feb 19
@metal-brain saidAre you implying that melting glaciers would not cause a rise in sea level?
You mean me rejecting the heat island effect? Why do you think the heat island effect is relevant temp data? It is not. That is why sea level data is best to look at. No heat island BS.
18 Feb 19
@wildgrass saidNo. Why in the heck would you think that? I said absolutely nothing to imply that at all.
Are you implying that melting glaciers would not cause a rise in sea level?