On Mar 11, 2:20 pm, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"Dan" wrote:
It is a simple matter to compare the isotopic ratio in the current
atmosphere to that in samples from ice cores.

Guess what that comparison reveals?

And these isotopes are recognizable in comparison to -- oh -- volcanic
activity? Or those altered by radiation exposure?

Yes, they are.

But that's irrelevant, of course. If these isotopes came from volcanoes
and
radiation exposure, the ratio would be the same in ice core samples as it
is
now, wouldn't it?

Yes they are because you said so or because there is evidence
supporting this?

Because there is evidence. I just told you what it is. The isotope ratios
of the modern atmosphere are different from samples going back hundreds of
thousands of years. Volcanoes and cosmic rays have been around the whole
time; the only thing new is people burning a ****-load of fossil fuel.



And -- to use the scientific term -- possibly.

This is about as close to a slam dunk as you'll ever get.

Hardly compelling.

Well, I can lead a denier to facts but I can't compel him to acknowledge
them.

Once again with the labels.

Well dammit, Dan, what do you want me to say? This is freshman chemistry
and geology stuff. Hell, even *I* can understand it. It's readily
available for you to check. It's not like it's a shocking new discovery.

Hang on -- I'm not doubting the presence of matter altered by
combustion.

But it does not follow that these CO2 molecules are independently
responsible for the observed rise in CO2 in the atmosphere.

Dan