In your dreams.
David

Ian McClintock,

WTF would it take to prove to you that increasing atmospheric CO2 is the prime cause of the global warming that occurred last century and is continuing to occur?

It has been proven beyond all doubt that increasing atmospheric CO2 absorbs and reradiates more of the infrared radiation that the ground emits when the sun's radiation warms it.

Temperature records very clearly show a warming trend. Meanwhile the statistical relationship between temperature and solar activity has broken down as atmospheric CO2 levels increased.

We know that there are positive and negative feedback mechanisms involving clouds. We do know how temperature affects cloud cover and vice versa. Research continues, and recently a big breakthrough has been made – see... http://www.smh.com.au/environment/-gq085t.html
...but we don't actually need to accurately quantify these effects to know what increasing atmospheric CO2 levels will do.

The fact that some CO2 is necessary for life does not prevent it from being a pollutant. There are many pollutants that in lower concentrations are essential for life. BTW the response of plants to increasing CO2 levels isn't always positive; sometimes it results in them producing more toxins.

Historically the carbon dioxide levels only changed very slowly except during mass extinction events. Rapid changes are bad for biodiversity because it usually takes multiple generations for species to adapt. Meanwhile many of these species are already under stress from other human activity. Increased CO2 and a warmer climate are likely to result in a lot of extinctions if we carry on the way we have been.

Because of the huge implications and costs involved, we should not let minor uncertainty about the details be used as an excuse for inaction. The more we delay, the higher the costs will be.

only regressives can see a man killing in the name of Allah and say its got nothing to do with religion. Only regressives can ignore that Hanson has largely picked up Abbott voters because they totally reject idiotic gw dogma and open borders. I thought Peter must of been one of the many dumbed down getup crowd but then realised he was a 'professor.' Talk about denial. Anyone noticed the cold snap lately. Its called winter. How could anyone be so blind.

Aidan.

The worlds temperatures (and climate) have always changed.

If it is now claimed that increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide has become the primary cause of the warming last century, rather than the normal and natural changes that occur, we do need sound evidence to support this claim.

Yes of course the world has warmed as it has recovered from the disastrous cold of the Little Ice Age and yes carbon dioxide has also increased, primarily from its release from the worlds oceans as they warm (Henry’s Law) and additional relatively small amounts from burning fossil fuels.

No evidence is available however that this increased carbon dioxide has been the cause of this warming despite billions of $’s spent trying to do so. This is not a trivial detail that can simply be ignored as you suggest.

What has been demonstrated back in the late 1800’s is that carbon dioxide, in a flask in a laboratory acts as a ‘greenhouse gas’.

That is, carbon dioxide molecules absorb a limited range of frequencies emitted by Infra Red (IR) radiation (heat rays) emitted by the Earth. They are then immediately re-emitted at the same frequencies in every direction.

This does not stop this radiation from escaping to space as some might imagine, but does slow this process down.

This response by carbon dioxide is however dwarfed by atmospheric water vapour which constitutes some 90-95% of the total greenhouse effect as it is present in much greater volumes and reacts over a much wider IR frequency spectrum.

There are frequency bands where none of the greenhouse gasses are active, allowing heat to be lost to space.

There is very good data illustrating a strong correlation between low level cloud cover (<3000m) and global temperature.

There is also good evidence to indicate that the present speed of temperature change is certainly not outside that in the historical record.

Biota has always prospered in a warming world, the problem will be when the world next cools.

Now let's see. 1.7 million Australian voters voted for right wing Independents instead of the Lib/Lab, Tweedledee/Treedledum parties, and Peter Bowden thinks that Turnbull lost the election because he was not left wing enough?

Oh yeah, Peter. That works.

Aidan, Robert Carter showed in 2009 that the carbon dioxide hypothesis is invalid. It is also a fact that there is no science to show any measurable human effect on climate.
“The IPCC’s computer general circulation models, which factor in the effect of increasing carbon dioxide, project that global warming should be occurring at a rate of +2.0&#778;C/century.”
Also,
“In fact, no warming at all has occurred in either the atmosphere or the ocean for more than the last decade. The models are clearly faulty, and allocate too great a warming effect for the extra carbon dioxide (technically, they are said to overestimate the climate sensitivity). Hypothesis fails”

https://wryheat.wordpress.com/2013/01/30/failure-of-the-anthropogenic-global-warming-hypothesis/

Why can't climate fraud promoters, like you, acknowledge the science, Aidan?