Dan Luke wrote:
"Matt Barrow" wrote:

Dan, the master of the logical fallacy (as he so aptly demonstrated).


:Just like Galileo, anyone who points out the inconsistencies and
: errors in the "established knowledge" are being hounded and
: villified. What's next -- someone who should know better telling them
: to "shut up"?

Calling them rapists of the planet? Calling them unAmerican?


:: Straight from Sol Alinsky, ignore the data and attack the people.

:: I'll take an empirical response using data over 1,000,000,000 opinions
:: any day of the week any month of the year.

Like, how it's demonstrated how CO2 follows temp increases rather than
leading them?

Well, now: look who's back!

Matty, you've already demonstrated you're out of your depth on this subject.
Why subject yourself to more humiliation?

Yes, as the Earth emerges from glaciations, CO2 rise follows temp. increases
rather than leading them. That's only part of the story and irrelevant to
the current circumstances. But you haven't the vaguest clue about the
*whole* story, have you? And don't care to *get* a clue, either.

Go away, Matty, before you get smashed again.

(Kdding. Please stick around. I enjoy the loon-whacking.)


Wow, holy oversimplification. If the only independent variable in the
world that affected global temperature was CO2, you might have a point.

Frankly, anyone who believes that climates will not warm and cool over
time is nuts. Sort of like the folks that expect barrier islands to
always maintain the same shape or are all surprised that rivers change
course too.