"Roger (K8RI)" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:09:12 -0700, "Matt W. Barrow"
wrote:


"Roger (K8RI)" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 13:32:44 -0700, "Matt W. Barrow"
wrote:


"Roger (K8RI)" wrote in message
m...
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:26:35 -0600, "Dan Luke"
wrote:


"Matt Whiting" wrote:

And CO2 is a by-product of a warming ocean. Please refute the
following
point by point. :-)

http://www.john-daly.com/oceanco2/oceanco2.htm


What's to refute?

"The sensitivity calculation, however, may be very reliable. It shows
that
natural temperature increase cannot be the whole reason for the
increase
of
atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration of about 80 ppm during this
century.
But the question of the `Chicken and the Egg' *for the ice core
measurements*
seems quite clear: First comes the warming, then comes the CO2. "

That has been historically true, but not this time. Now it's the CO2
leading the temp.

No, it's not - sorry. Try understanding CO2 forcing action.

I understand it quite well, which is why I'm emphasizing the CO2 is
leading. It's the opposite of what you'd expect. IOW we are not seeing
the CO2 forcing. What we are seeing is an *unnatural* rise in CO2 that
is not due to nature.

No, it is not un-natural...otherwise it what would explain the 4000ppm

If you take a look at the legitimate scientific studies you will see
that at present the CO2 rise is ahead of the temperature. Where did
the CO2 come from?
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...an-activities/

I'd believe realclimate.org about as much as I'd believe NationalEnquirer.

Whichis what the researchers say about John daly. :-)) Neither side
can understand the other.:-))

At least Daly's work is backed by data that has NOT been refuted or found to
be fraudulent.

We're finding out that the greenies are unmitigated liars.