- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
1) If sharp rises cause a rise in temperature, and it could be proved, it would have been PROVED and there would be no argument.
2) The data is that CO2 rises, other than in Al Gore's mind, do NOT precede temperature changes.
3) The current data is that the sun cycle is what has driven temperature changes, not CO2 rises.
4) CO2 levels have been higher and lower in the past and temperatures have been higher and lower. CO2 levels drop AFTER temperatures drop and rise AFTER temperatures rise. IF CO2 levels produce the positive-feedback inexorable rise in temperature that is the basis of the computer models, why are we not at 400 degrees Fahrenheit NOW if CO2 levels were much higher in the past?
5) A great deal of what the THEORY of manmade global warming has been based upon has been disproved recently, as the articles showing the CO2 levels to be approaching insignificance as a greenhouse gas.
6) Much of the manmade global warming theory is based upon positing CO2 as a significant greenhouse gas, that CO2 is a driver of temp change, and both propositions have come under great question recently.
If you can PROVE your points, prove them.
If it COULD be PROVED, we wouldn't be having an argument.
