Climate Change - Bob Carters 5 Tests of Co2 part 2

[MaluronLurette]

Sorry Bob - that was a pretty poor attempt. All you prove with your five tests is your obvious ignorance regarding global warming and climate change.

[aus2045]

@MaluronLurette Tell us something we are missing then?

[MaluronLurette]

@aus2045 "Tell us something we are missing then?"--

Please clarify what you mean, or to what you refer.

I've referred to Bob Carter's particular tests in the previous comments.

[MaluronLurette]

-> "Test 5" (Satellites show no warming in the troposphere): Actually, satellite data do show warming in the Tropsphere when a cooling bias from the Stratosphere is removed. The measurements match model results apart from in the tropics, due to data errors.

[MaluronLurette]

-> "Test 4" (CO2 lags temperature): Just as mentioned in the previous comment - Bob proves once more his lack of understanding how climate works, since he doesn't know (or intentionally ignores) the fact that CO2 is not the only driver of the climate.

The warming after the last Ice Age was caused by a change of the Earth's orbit (->Milankovitch cycles), not by CO2.

[MaluronLurette]

-> "Test 3" (correlation temperature / CO2): What Bob obviously doesn't understand is, that CO2 is not the only driver of the climate. It's a similar lack of basic knowledge like in the common argument that "CO2 (ALWAYS) lags temperature". The post-war era until ~1980 also faced a strong increase of anthropogenic sulfate aerosols which have a cooling effect.

Further, it's ridiculous to say that there is no correlation. Even the curves Bob uses here are clearly showing a strong correlation.

[HarrynJessie]

@MaluronLurette all he was doing was demonstrating that temperature increases precede CO2 increases. Not the other way round as the zeit geist would have us believe. If his conclusion was wrong, you must explain why CO2 increases do in fact precede temperature increases and provide evidence to support. You have done none of these things with this particular comment.

[MaluronLurette]

@HarrynJessie "all he was doing was demonstrating that temperature increases precede CO2 increases. "--

And this demonstration is nonsense, it's merely propaganda that's leaving out important facts. CO2 lags temperature only whenit's not the trigger of a warming. The warming after the Ice Age was triggered by changes of the earth orbit, not by CO2. CO2 acted as an amplifier, that's why it lags temperature, according to the ice core data [...]

[MaluronLurette]

@HarrynJessie [...] Look, this is not new knowledge. That's what climate scientists predicted already in 1990, what the paper of Lorius et al., "The ice-core record: Climate sensitivity [...]" demonstrates. Like other "skeptics", Carter manipulates the conclusion "CO2 lags temperature when it's not trigger but amplifier of a warming", changing it to "CO2 ALWAYS lags temperature (= hence it's not responsible for GW)". Either because he's ignorant, or because he is deliberately lying.

[Olympicgardens]

Keep in your mind, that the CO2-taxation is in the hands of private banks ! They get the profit out of the so called Climate Worming Crisis. No Third-World-Country will get anything from Goldman-Sucks and friends !

[swerve1960]

So-called man-made global warming is a scam designed to frighten people into paying more tax. When they get this money, idiot politicians waste it on completely useless projects designed to make them feel good & look 'nice' in front of a compliant media. Examples of this idiotic thought process are wind turbines (my fuel bills have rocketed) and bio-fuels (farmers grow them so there is less food, hence prices go up). And guess what? It does not make any difference whatsoever! get real!

[luc59457]

There are other factors (natural disasters, sunspots) to take into account for the specific years where bob pointed out (graph of Co2 and temperature) Yet, most of it does corelate and flows parallel, I can tell from the first 2 minutes of this video it is bogus and a lot of people are getting brainwashed. Just because he's a professor does not make him always accurate.

[Wien1938]

The HC was not found to have committed scientific fraud because it chose the evidence and questions to the committee. Phil Jones was one of two people chosing the papers to be examined.

That is corrupt.

[rugbyguy59]

Bob Carter doesn't have a fucking clue. The whole CO2 lags was predicted by AGW proponents. This releases CO2 which amplifies the effects. Natural changes precede the CO2 changes in the past, but this time we are providing the CO2 without the natural changes.. Any real scientist knows this. At least any honest scientist.

This man is a complete failure on all his tests. His work has been completely debunked by real experts in the fields he pretends to know.

[Wien1938]

@rugbyguy59

The geological record does NOT support the AGW hypothesis. There is no proof that temperature is driven by CO2 emissions as the ice core surveys have shown.

The Hockey Stick has been discredited as scientifically fraudulent. The Hadley Centre have been caught out committing scientific fraud recently and have only been able to evade the charges because they were able to rig the enquiries in their favour.

There is more evidence in favour of solar influence driving climate.

[rugbyguy59]

@Wien1938 Ice core surveys show CO2 follows temp. They also show CO2 drives temp much higher. This shows the power of CO2 as forcing. What is far more important than ice cores is the direct, empirical data from on the ground and satellites showing CO2 trapping more heat in the atmosphere. CO2 can drive climate. It is now.

The hockey stick is supported by the NAS and has been replicated by a variety of other proxy records.

HC - no fraud.

Solar - in the past not for the past 30 years.

0 for 4

[Piddy555]

Test 3, why does Bob expect CO2 levels to immediately affect temps? Surface temps fluctuate naturally, secondly the forcing of CO2 at a particular level will take years to warm up the ocean. Thirdly, these modern day temps have yet to incorporate the longer term feedbacks, such as albedo change.

[OvoidCranium]

@Piddy555 "why does Bob expect CO2 levels to immediately affect temps? "

It's a very weak 2nd order effect similar to putting your finger partially over the end of a water hose which immediately leaves the hose at higher velocity. Additional CO2 does not accumulate more heat it just closes the atmospheric IR window a little.

[purchville]

Ha ha ha! CO2 causing global warming??? Oh I am so scared...

Just wait till Mt Erebus "farts" and then you'll know what increase in CO2 is all about...It will make human made CO2 look like a dead sardine in the Pacific...and it will cool the planet, cause famine, wars & disease.

Cooling is the issue people...not warming...as history will show you...

[ferry34]

I was 100% certain that the global warming was due to mankinds polution of CO2. Yes, I saw the docu of Al Gore.

Bob Carter however opened my eyes. The graphics with shows the warmer periode in the Medevils is convincing.

It makes more sence that we spend the money on protection against the rising water or maybe the coming cold, instead of the miljons for reducing CO2.

Polution is ofcourse a big problem and electric cars are welcome, but tell people the truth!

[sw8741]

@ferry34

see how easily swayed you and the public are? something is pounded into your head over yrs by groups trying to get your support and you go along. it doesn't mean what they say is true, but your convinced of it because its been pounded into your head! take EVERYTHING you hear or read with a grain of salt. be very skeptical of "experts"

[PalleSchultz]

Docu of Al Gore..... Documentary is probably stretching it a little. ;)

[BaronVonLichtenstein]

I think there is a general consensus among scientists on global warming. The only one not in agreement is the planet, who never got the news and has been cooling and will continue to cool, despite the politicians and scientists best efforts to save it. This is tragic. How are we to stop global warming if the planet insists on cooling all by itself, even as C02 rises? Worse, since cooling decreases plants and animals the C02 levels will also decrease. I'm worried about politicians and the IPCC.

[gnacdak]

Another point that the warmers can't or won't address - What is causing the warming on Mars and Venus? Do you think it might be that big orange orb in the sky during the daytime? Nah - the source of global warming and cooling for the past millions of years has no effect this time around? The followers of this ruse are either too ignorant to know they are being played - or complicit in the fraud.

[Zil2112]

Not to mention that the atmosphere of Mars is 95% CO2 yet the planet's surface temp is -100 degrees. It should be boiling hot!!

[imbrd]

o no- not the martians! i think we probably killed the martians w/ some serious methane- its always the cows&methane. lol or polar bears- then we boiled the cows, had some steak & the planet just cooled down

[MaluronLurette]

@Zil2112 " the atmosphere of Mars is 95% CO2 yet the planet's surface temp is -100 degrees. It should be boiling hot!!"--

No. The atmosphere of the Mars only has 0.6 % of the barometric pressure of the earth's atm., and the total amount of CO2 in the Mars amosphere is not much more than on earth. Secondly, Mars is much far away from the sun than the earth.

Thanks for exposing your ignorance regarding the use of percentages and the understanding of climate processes.

[gnacdak]

Anyone using a sixth grade education in science - and not allowing for a predetermined biased outcome - can easily see that the data does not support AGW - case closed - except for whiney non science based emotional outbursts from one world government looters who want a handout

[arthroscope]

Bob, you are a champion of the highest order.

[SteveNetwriter]

In reply to aerobique:

"Phil Jones is member of a has received funding from corporate interests including OIL companies.

case closed"

aerobique, your libellous lies simply do not work any more. People have read the emails and examined the data.

Your attempt to persuade people to avoid listening to good scientists like Bob Carter now just sound absolutely STUPID.

[aerobique]

Carter is member of a right-wing "think tank" group that has received funding from corporate interests including OIL companies.

case closed

[DarkwingScooter]

I don't think you understand how science works, your argument is a logical fallacy of first order.

The only logic I can see in the AGW argument is Ad Hominems, emotional appeals and horribly fallacious causal reasoning. Then you find that the raw data is cherry picked as well. Give me a break.

I used to be sympathetic to the green movement, but now I have come to realise that they are by far the bigger danger. They are the cause of all this CO2 in the first place by being anti-nuclear.

[glennimmortal]

100% agree

[glennimmortal]

prove it

[MrOllyK]

Like I said since I was a teenager (some 25 years ago) that global warming protagonists should save some of that hot air they're blowing for the next ice age.

Our main problem is overpopulation, which was discussed just as heavily in the '70's as I recall, but now you hear nothing, except John Howard (ex-Aussie PM) saying "Populate or perish". Makes me wonder where our leaders get their facts. Reducing world population will be difficult, as economies don't work this way.

[zor98765]

The UN and media have been telling only one side of the story -- and that fact alone shows that something very sinister is going on.

[DarkwingScooter]

I wonder what brand of Champagne he is consuming now after the "Climategate" thing broke.

I saw one of these vids a year a go and couldn't debunk the guy, now of course it is clear that the reason was that he is 100% correct.

[aerobique]

@darkwing scooter

Carter is member of a right-wing "think tank" group that has received funding from corporate interests including OIL companies.

case closed

[alignwithtruth]

Bob, you're a hero for standing up and explaining the truth. I have great admiration for you, and others like you, eg: Christopher Monckton, Roy Spencer, Richard Lindzen, Craig Idso, David Evans, etc

[bullsnutsoz]

And also Bob; if you get this, its blokes like you that keep this world sane; in its dumb way.

Can you tell me this; why can men frighten women then hold out the remedy ;sell it to em; and get away with it!

This is a scam that all men should consider, it is a great racket

Danny

[gettinmore]

you are being watched and heard, so if you would like security I suggest you give away all your wealth but $200k of your total wealth, then YOU will be PERMITTED your opinion! careful!

[bullsnutsoz]

You are very ill , take an aspro and lie down in the dark.

have you heard the US election results tonight? Maybe you should. Then have a little think before you write anything.

[gettinmore]

Dumbing down is history "(bulls)nuts", so is USA's insane greed, and you missed your time for open mindedness, for this has less to do with environment than greed, abuse, and what is truly right for the people. you should be the poster boy for assholes. tell me to lay down and do drugs! and calls me sick, all the while having a voice willing to risk my drinking water and air for war and toys! carefull

[bullsnutsoz]

gettinmore, stay focused; mother nature has changed climates and always will since Christ played fullback for jerusalum.

As per gores graph, there is nothing new!

I have travelled and worked extensively in the US, it and Australia are the cleanest countries in the world by far.

Why do you hate your beautiful country?

Your drinking water is the best as per ours; look at all the counties where you need bottle water, russia, the east try and convince me they have it better, get hold of yourself

[gettinmore]

I aggree the land is beautiful and I do want to trust you all but so many can be so cruel it might be too late. I don't truely hate I guess I am just use to stickin up for atleast myself. I want to be sorry for all these chaotic thoughts but I'm afraid of makin wrongs choices wow sobbing laughably

[bullsnutsoz]

Freeking good Bob

[lmjhoney]

Ok what is the effect of all ths co2 created over millions of years being suddenly released into the atmosphere?

[McDoulgham]

Nothing! The ammount is so little compared to the CO2 trapped in other substances, that it does not make noticeable changes. However look out for other nasty industrial pollutants. By the way, the biggest polluters are armies and wars. Just an example, in Belgium, they are still cleaning up the mess after WW1, yes one! And according to the army, they will do so for the next 50 years at least! So, think of Korea, Vietnam, Irak, Afghanistan, Nicaragua etc. etc. There is the real problem, my friend

[DeusExMachina7709]

The amount is so little compared to what?

Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations have risen by 40%.

[McDoulgham]

Ok here is a little math Atmosphere= 20% O2 approx. 79% N approx. 0.9 % Argon 0,038% CO2 and on average 1% Water vapor as well, which is by the way a much more powerful greenhouse gas. If you take 0,038% CO2 as 100% than you get about 1% of this as anthropogenic CO2. The rest, 99%, is emitted by Nature itself.

[DeusExMachina7709]

H2O isn't more powerful, it's simply more abundant.

Most compounds in the atmosphere are diatomic and virtually transparent to IR. So the remaining compounds, like H2O, N2O, and CO2, play a disproportionate role in climate.

Most CO2 is emitted by natural sources. But natural emissions are incorporated into the carbon cycle. What's left over resides in the troposphere. We know the CO2 in the atm. is man made due to its isotopic signature.

[oomblikkies]

True DeusEx.. , but where is the proof (note: not just a claim or statement) that CO2 drives climate? Earths climatic record does not support that claim. All this scare mongering comes from unreliable climatic models.

[DeusExMachina7709]

oomb,

There is no "proof."  You can't "prove" the AGW theory, you can't "prove" ANY theory. That includes the theories of gravity, cells, atoms, germs (the theory that pathogens cause disease), and evolution. None of these well-established scientific phenomenon can be "proven." Are you skeptical of them, too?

[oomblikkies]

DeusEx. All I'm trying to say that CO2 follows warming - it is not causing it (well at least at current CO2 levels ... the undisputed fact is CO2 has a logarithmic effect on temp. i.e. temp will go up by 1 ºC if the CO2 level doubles thus the current 400ppm CO2 must go to 800ppm for another 1ºC rise, but the last 10 years, CO2 has gone up by only 4% and earths climatic record shows CO2 levels up 5x what they are today and many species survived that - including polar bears!

[DeusExMachina7709]

continued,

CO2 can and has been the primary forcing of climate before, as shown by the PETM and the Neoproterozoic era.

Polar bears have existed for 200k years. Back then, CO2 concentrations were relatively constant.

upload . wikimedia . org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/Car­bon_Dioxide_400kyr . png

CO2 concen. and temps have vacillated wildly throughout the geological history, and extreme vacillations have corresponded to mass extinctions, like the P-Tr.

[oomblikkies]

DeusEx. You say natural emissions are incorporated into the carbon cycle. Are they? There is a fair understanding of how much CO2 is released by volcanoes all over the continents, BUT more than 70% of all volcanoes are below the surface of the sea and scientist have no idea how much CO2 is released by those.

[DeusExMachina7709]

If CO2 levels were increasing because of volcanic emissions we'd know it because of its isotopic signature. The sig shows a large ratio of 'old' carbon, which means the spike in atmospheric concentrations is caused by humans.

CO2 doesn't always follow warming. That's a common refrain among people who know nothing about climate. It's only true (as per Henry's law) when CO2 isn't the main forcing, and higher temperatures make CO2 less soluble in water.

[abdula31]

Take a shower yourself dirty pig.

[abdula31]

0:30 take a closer look at that. I think the temperature will drop in the near future.

[ggmorvaj]

OMG.....sorry I hit the thumbs-down icon instead of the thumbs-up on your comment & 2 others, I'll try to fix it.

[JuanVoyce]

He is just your typical full-of-shit Australian.

[uploadJ]

"Change in temperature is preceeds the change in CO2 by a few hundred to a few thousand years."

Got that?

it's from study of the Volstock Ice core ..

Temperature leads the CO2 increase, not the other way around.

[JuanVoyce]

In the natural cycle temperature does lead, then CO2 follows hundreds of years later. Once CO2 begins ramping-up there is a positive feed-back chain that forces an increase in temperature, and the amplification continues until the ocean-current conveyor reverses the cycle 10,000 years later. The new actor here is AGW Anthropogenic Greenhouse Warming, which you can clearly see on his graph, inverted the "natural" relationship in 1945. Look at it again with the volume in "off" position.

[Granite46]

Can you describe in more detail your CO2 induced positive feed-back chain?

[JuanVoyce]

I'll be glad to, Marty. Rememger what happened the last several times you left the dog in the car in the middle of the day with the windows rolled-up? (I don't fault you for blocking.) The temperature inside the car was amplified by radiant energy from the sun + build-up of trapped energy from the greenhouse effect.

[Granite46]

That's not a description (Marty?). I was hoping that you could provide something along the lines of a scientific justification. Not a "Dora the Explorer" explanation.

Jeez, ask a simle question. I guess this is to be expected on youtube!

Something that can be verified in a scientific publication maybe.

[JuanVoyce]

You are using Marty Feldman's picture for your icon. (jeez!) OK, so it's a serious question? As temperature rises: Carbon Sinks decline, forests & oceans lose their ability to process and bury carbon; Reflectivity of Ice Caps declines, more solar energy is absorbed; Permafrost declines, loss releases trapped CO2 and CH4; Water Vapor increases, warm air holds more moisture, a potent GHG; Chemical Weathering declines, as ocean levels rise, less rock is exposed to the CO2.

[Granite46]

Yes, I am using Marty Feldman picture. Funny, I didn't make the connection. no one's ever commented on it before.

BTW, the most prominent part of your icon picture is someone's backside. I'm not reading anything into that though (honest).

Also, you have a great Woody Allen quote which I also quote on my channel.

Anyway, thanks for the "serious" response. I was just probing your logic.

[JuanVoyce]

Your welcome, and thank you, too! I first read that Woody Allen quote on your channel and like it so much I made a copy for my channel.

[uploadJ]

JuanVoyce: "In the natural cycle temperature does lead, then CO2 follows hundreds of years later. Once CO2 begins ramping-up there is a positive feed-back chain that .."

Wrong Juan.

The system WOULD have latched up given your explanation, and CLEARLY, over the ice core record, at least, IT NEVER HAS LATCHED UP (look up feedback and servo theory for the gory technical details of LATCHUP).

What makes you think it will THIS time Juan?

b/c a government study says so?

Bzzzzzt! Wrong!

[JuanVoyce]

uploadJ - "look up feedback and servo theory for the gory technical details of LATCHUP"

Why don't you explain how this short-circuit metaphor reinforces your denialist mind-set?

[uploadJ]

JuanVoyce: "Why don't you explain how this short-circuit metaphor reinforces your denialist mind-set?"

So, Juan's liberal arts degree program didn't cover this important aspect of physics and enginneering? Too bad.

This means Juan probably doesn't really understand 'feedback' in climate either.

So don't listen to him.

He appears to be scientifically illiterate, and can only regurgitate what he's been indoctrinated with, via the church of AGW lead by Rev. James Hansen and AlGore.

[JuanVoyce]

the ad hominem argument is the weakest and most desparate form

[uploadJ]

JuanVoyce: "the ad hominem argument is the weakest and most desparate form"

The quality of your evidence and your interpretation of same (shedding light on your technical ability) are fair game.

As the ravings of a loon are to be ignored as soon as identified as such.

Come table better prepared, ye 'ad hom' user yourself. (What do you think 'denialist' means? Do you think you 'get a pass' if you use that term? Pls, cry 'foul' to mom or GF/BF, she/he might comfort you, I won't)

.

.

[JuanVoyce]

What I am still waiting for is your explanation of how "latch-up" relates to AGW. If you don't have one, stfu.

[uploadJ]

JuanVoyce: "What I am still waiting for is your explanation of how "latch-up" relates to AGW. If you don't have one, stfu."

What an attiude!

Why don't you look it up? I don't feel like dealing with someone nasty.

I think I have put out enough information for smart folks, those who have anything besides a lib arts degree have enough info.

Going into feedback theory and 'closed loops' would be like talking physics to a dog; it would bore me but probably entertain the dog ...

.

.

[gerjanp]

"uploadJ - "look up feedback and servo theory for the gory technical details of LATCHUP""

Yep but turn the power off and no more latch up. System earth is not an active servo mechanism but a passive dissipative one any notion of positive feedback in such a system is a violation of the second law of thermodynamics.

[JuanVoyce]

I'm not sure on this but, I would assume that one of Carnot's assumptions was that his cylinders wouldn't melt.

[ggmorvaj]

I'm sorry,but your hypothesis of ....CO2 increase providing positive feedback to the forcing effect of temp. increase.... is not only unproven,but impossible. If the 2 forces were "mutually reinforcing" the planet would roast in much less time than your stated 10,000 yrs. I'm a farmer,not a physicist, but I can recognize nonsense when I read it.

[JuanVoyce]

It is assumed that most feedbacks are positive, amplifying the slight warming (.3º-1.2ºC) caused by CO2.

[gerjanp]

"It is assumed that most feedbacks are positive"

well remember the saying "assume" makes an ass out of U and me.

Positive feedback which mandates more energy out than in is only possible where there is an internal or auxiliary power reservoir. The climate system posses no such reservoir.

[JuanVoyce]

I think what we have here is a failure to communicate. I'm referring to retained heat, not to your banjo amplifier.

[uploadJ]

gerjanp: "there is an internal or auxiliary power reservoir. The climate system posses no such reservoir."

Ice, water vapor, plant matter; three forms of non-linear storage ...

.

.

[gerjanp]

"Ice, water vapor, plant matter; three forms of non-linear storage ..."

the key word is storage the only source of energy remains the sun and what they store comes from there they are just part of the passive dissipative system they do not provide amplification which doesn't just imply but mandates that you get more power/energy out than you put in.

[Granite46]

I just realized you are the person who pointed out to me the "cute conservatives" on Fox.

Regarding your comment "where have you been? it's like the #1 turn-on for those cute conservatives "...Someone gave you 2 thumbs down for that! WTF

[JuanVoyce]

It's a signature trait of denialists (present company excluded)--no sense of humor.

[uploadJ]

Compared to the religeous zeal exhibited shown by the warmers? You're kidding right?

James Hansen of NASA/GISS comparing coal trains to N azi deat h trains of WWII? (You want a link to that quote, I'll gladly provide one.)

.

.

[xtreme1002003]

Can I have a link to that quote please?

[uploadJ]

Compared to the curmudgeons, prunes and demigods on PMSNBC ... oh, so-sorry, I'm not being politically correct now ami I.

Kissy kissy make-up make-up ... fluffy bunnies and happy fun balls to all !!

[juggernautxtr]

what pisses me off most, is that i am a conservative christian I will not deny that fact.

if these liberals were so educated that they can out think us why do us Christians look for reality more than the fiction of a computer model that does exactly what it is told to do. prove global warming. Who designed the computer? who programmed the computer and can i get everybody to believe this model?

sorry I ain't a sucker buying into scare tactics.

[lgr1991]

lung cancer causes smoking, that bit cracked me up

[xtreme1002003]

lol

[Tastysodiumchloride]

Come on you can't believe this guy. He didn't even bother to use pictures of wastelands, crying and starving babies, flooding, and worst yet he used real scientific analysis. Please buy me newest invention, The Personal CO2 Capture Lung, all profit goes to the Smooth Brain Foundation. It's made from recycled and reusable materials. Take 1 plastic bag pull it over your head and breath for 2 minutes and you will not produce anymore CO2. Go BLUE!

[xtreme1002003]

Yeah! And he absolutely refused to use any pictures of those poor polar bears floating on those chunks of ice in the middle of the ocean too! How terrible!

lol

[davidnightingale]

People should checkout the Club of Rome members, the need for a Global Tax to fund Global Government, and ask who is going to be selling carbon credits. Just look at the debit we are in already due to plastic Credits. Pehaps we have a new era call it AG after Al Gore, politicians have all become totally honest, they no longer have political agendas or represent their corporate sponsors.

[Loewenherz27]

Take a look at this, Greenpeace! What do you say now?

[mortalmerlin]

Did you know the founder of greenpeace does not buy into the AGW theory?

[essayetee]

Very well done.  Prof. Carter is a true credit to the Australian and world scientific community.

Very well done indeed.

Bravo!

[alexhamster1134]

@essayetee thought he was a kiwi?

[nicolasinAUM]

I read a comment one time on how Bob Carter didn't know what he's on about???

We live on a planet of brainwashed idiots

Bob's totally on the case...good job someone is

Peace all.............

[smartalek65]

Excellent scientific presentation by Prof. Carter. I have yet to see a real answer to these points (human greenhouse warming) failing 5 tests by science. I've read all the "how to talk to a skeptic" guides, and I come away unimpressed, as none have an answer to these facts, especially that the co2 rise always followed the temp rise. All I ever get is "that was then, this is now." I'd really laugh is this subject wasn't taken so seriously by governments.

[sydneydoc]

Very good.

[ggmorvaj]

Sorry, I accidentally hit the "thumbsdown" on your comment, when I meant to give it the thumbsup...wonder if there's a way to fix that?

[gerjanp]

Excellent pair of videos succinct and to the point.

[ggmorvaj]

Really sorry, I hit the thumbs-down icon instead of the thumb-up on your comment & the 2 comments just below it....(a late-afternoon attentiveness low??)

[fluff125]

uhh yeah, I um, made the same mistake on all three of your comments. Riiiight.

[ggmorvaj]

Hey buddy......I wasn't being sarcastic, I meant what I posted.....I hit the thumbsdown by MISTAKE during a low-caffeine moment. .....You've got a really low opinion of human nature to give someone a thumbs-down for trying to apologize to people that they think they've insulted (by accident).Just wanted to let them know I agreed(not disagreed) with their comments.....Shame on you.I'm tempted to give YOU a thumbsdown!!!!