25 NASA Scientists Question the Sanity of the Global Warmists

submitted by sawboss from youtube.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Of course not.

CO2 accounts for about 0.04% of the atmosphere, and it's a top contributor to the greenhouse effect, so 0.01% is actually pretty major.

This is your claim, not mine. If CO2 is a top contributor, as you claim, then why haven't temperatures increased by some significant margin, or relavent ratio?

[–]anescient 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I'm sorry, I was sure you'd be familiar with this data. The correlation of CO2 and temperature goes way, way back:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vostok_Petit_data.svg

... and more specifically on anthropogenic:

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/climateqa/category/climate-human-impact/

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You may recall that man made climate change was once called man made global warming.

They changed the name to climate change, because the warming trend was bogus, and indefensible.

[–]anescient 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

In other words.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly!!!

My man! ;-)

Edit: You hit it out of the park. Respect.