"Sure CO2 is natural. Water is natural, even essential for life! But drinking too much of it can kill you!

Now Leo, Forget the effecting weather for now and just focus on the gas its self...over the history of the planet, Co2 has played many deadly roll in some major extinctions as you know and since all life needs an equal amount of the gases we breath....now I want you think about the insect life around you.....

They don't have lungs do they Leo, and remember when insects ruled the planet at one stage?, but then C02 increased and the O2 went down and so did the size of the insects...didn't it Leo....so the point"if you cant see it"...Insect will get smaller or it will just kill them off all together?

Wont the planet be fun then:)

Tally

Determined not to learn, aren’t you, Max?
Nature has a huge carbon cycle, involving 3% human emissions and 97% natural CO2. It does not distinguish between natural and human produced CO2, and does not put aside the 3% human emitted for accumulation. In any event, we are yet to see CO2 have the effect in nature that it has in the labotatory. The IPCC worked on this basis in setting up its computer models, which fail in their projections.
Relevant comment by Anthony Watts:
“According to CO2 theory, we should see long term rise of mean temperatures, and while there may be yearly patterns of weather that diminish the effect of the short term, one would expect to see some sort of correlation over a decade. But it appears that………there isn’t any match over the past ten ears"
.”http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/01/25/warming-trend-pdo-and-solar-correlate-better-than-co2/

The Daily Mail factually reported what Jones said, so your complaint is ridiculous. You have to accept what a fraud-backing climategate miscreant said.You do not like what he said, so you complain about the source of the information, which had faithfully reported his words.

If you want peer reviewed, try McLean, J., de Freitas, C.R. & Carter, R.M., (2009) Influence of the Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature. Journal of Geophysical Research 114, D14104,doi:10.1029/2008JD011637.1
It can be accessed at: http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.
This shows that global warming is caused by natural cycles, leaving little room for the fraud-backers assertion that it is human caused.Read the Climategate emails to see the consternation of the fraud-backers about this paper.

Max,

Poor old Leo who only speaks denier is at it again.

Ho hum...

"In 2010, Phil Jones, the Climategate miscreant said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming."

http://www.skepticalscience.com/phil-jones-warming-since-1995-significant.html

"Phil Jones was asked some loaded questions in an interview with the BBC. Several of the questions were gathered from "climate sceptics", and Jones' answer to the second one has been widely re-published and distorted:

"Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming?"

"Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods."

Why choose 1995 as the starting point in this question? Well, that is the closest year for which the answer to this loaded question is "yes". From 1994 to 2009, the warming trend in the HadCRUT dataset was statistically significant at the 95% confidence level (CL). It's also worth noting that there's nothing magical about the 95% CL - it's simply the most commonly-used interval in scientific research, but it's also true that the HadCRUT 1995-2009 trend was statistically significant at a 93% confidence level.

In other words, using Jones' data, we could say with 93% confidence that the planet had warmed since 1995. Nevertheless, this did not stop numerous mainstream media outlets like Fox News claiming that Phil Jones had said global warming since 1995 was "insignificant" - a grossly incorrect misrepresentation of his actual statements."

"The Daily Mail warped the truth even further, claiming Jones had said there was no global warming since 1995. These media outlets turned 93% confidence of warming into "no warming"."

Leo says:

"The Daily Mail factually reported what Jones said....which had faithfully reported his words."

Lol!

Leo,
I’ll grant nature has a much larger CO2 cycle that in it’s *release* phase is 200gigatons compared to our 28gigatons per year. But where you’re being particularly stubborn and obtuse is that you’re *purposely* ignoring the fact that NATURE ONLY SOAKS UP THAT 200 GIGATONS AGAIN EVERY SPRING!

1. WHY IS THE CO2 CONTINUING TO RISE IN OUR ATMOSPHERE?

2. WHY DOES THE ISOTOPE OF THE EXTRA CO2 IN OUR ATMOSPHERE MATCH FOSSIL FUELS, AND NOT NATURAL CO2?

3. WHY DO YOU QUOTE ANTI-SCIENCE, NON-PEER REVIEWED WATTS? He is not a climatologist but instead:

“Anthony Watts studied Electrical Engineering and Meteorology at Purdue University, but he did not graduate. [1], [2]

He is a former television meteorologist.”
http://www.desmogblog.com/anthony-watts

“The Daily Mail factually reported what Jones said, so your complaint is ridiculous”
The Daily Mail is tabloid journalism, so you’re putting it forth as a credible scientific source is UTTERLY RIDICULOUS. You should be ashamed of the low quality of your sources! Here are some BIG players in science that you ignore, preferring ‘tabloid’ and ‘tinfoil hat’ over science.

“The American Geophysical Union issued a statement that they found "it offensive that these emails were obtained by illegal cyber attacks and they are being exploited to distort the scientific debate about the urgent issue of climate change."

“The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) reaffirmed its position on global warming and "expressed grave concerns that the illegal release of private emails stolen from the University of East Anglia should not cause policy-makers and the public to become confused about the scientific basis of global climate change. “

“UK Met Office[edit]
On 23 November 2009, a spokesman for the Met Office, the UK's national weather service, which works with the CRU in providing global temperature information, said there was no need for an inquiry. "The bottom line is that temperatures continue to rise and humans are responsible for it. We have every confidence in the science and the various datasets we use. The peer-review process is as robust as it could possibly be."[39]”

Leo,
the investigations into 'climategate' proved nothing.

The Hadley crew were exonerated by:

House of Commons Science and Technology Committee
Science Assessment Panel
Pennsylvania State University

and many more.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy#Responses

Indeed, the United States Environmental Protection Agency report said:
“The EPA examined every email and concluded that there was no merit to the claims in the petitions, which "routinely misunderstood the scientific issues", reached "faulty scientific conclusions", "resorted to hyperbole", and "often cherry-pick language that creates the suggestion or appearance of impropriety, without looking deeper into the issues."[113] “

Anyone who has actually looked at the context of “Hide the decline” would say, “Well D’UH!” Of COURSE the Denialist’s cherrypicked the phrases they needed to pull the tinfoil hats over so many gullible heads!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy#Responses

Last, you STILL haven’t dealt with the EVIDENCE!

Known physics: watch the CANDLE for just one minute! Starts 90 seconds in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6Un69RMNSw

Discovered 200 years ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Fourier#Discovery_of_the_greenhouse_effect

Mathematics around more CO2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative_forcing

Global Warming = ocean warming
http://climate.nasa.gov/news/2201/

Glaciers retreating:
http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths/images/glacier-retreat

Max,

"Last, you STILL haven’t dealt with the EVIDENCE!"

With all due respect, we've been firing all this stuff at Leo for years.

Leo doesn't care about evidence.

Deniers are termed deniers because they deny evidence and expertise.

It's all a conspiracy/fraud/sham, don't ya know!