Most of the things we use fossil fuels for generate heat. Cooking our food, heating our homes, thousands of industrial processes & generating electricity all add heat to our environment, so obviously fossil fuels are responsible for a small percentage of our temperature. Many other uses generate heat as a byproduct, such as powering internal combustion engines

Converting to electricity for all those heating applications will not reduce this heating at all. Electrical transport power will reduce heat production at point of use, but the much greater mining & purification required to produce electric vehicles & batteries will basically nullify this advantage with the heat produced in these processes. The same goes for solar & wind generation. Most realistic figures prove that neither will produce in their lifetime as much energy as used in their production & instillation, no heat saving there.

Years ago I simply believed the global warming scam, without a moments thought, but then some of the ridiculous garbage claimed of the effects of CO2 started me wondering. Left handed fish which don't avoid their predators anyone? I spent a few months getting my math back up to what it had been at uni. & then started looking at the equations.

It didn't take long, a couple of days to see what a pile of garbage the whole scam is.

Obviously 95+% of people don't have the math to do this, so can only either accept or deny what they are told by "experts", working for whom?

Yes CO2 has a very minor warming effect, but very little. Cloudy nights are warm, but on those cold clear nights, there is still just as much CO2 up there, doing stuff all to keep you warm. That is a simple demonstration of how little warming effect CO2 actually has. The rest of the effects claimed for the much maligned critical molecule are equally overstated.

Time to wake up to the con job that is global warming. A small number of people are making huge fortunes from the scam, to the detriment of most.

With our planet being a dynamic system the climate is changing, and will continue to change, regardless of what we do as some other commentators have correctly said.
What is happening is the rate of change and this is, no doubt in my mind, being altered and exacerbated by us, homo sapiens, by continually creating the need, or more likely want, for more and more.
The obvious solution would be to reduce this want and the only way is to aim for, and reduce to, a sustainable population.
We shall sooner or later cease to exist having bred ourselves out of house and home and remain in (unread) history as the only animal species who did this by wantonly destroying our own life sustaining environment because of our own greed.

It’s true that not every flood, storm and bushfire is the results of climate change, and we need to distinguish between weather and climate.

But it’s also true that scientists predict that these events will become more common because of climate change, and increasingly they are able to identify the likelihood that a particular event due to manmade climate change:

https://www.ametsoc.org/ams/index.cfm/publications/bulletin-of-the-american-meteorological-society-bams/explaining-extreme-events-from-a-climate-perspective/

The things Murray accused mainstream commentors of doing – cherry picking, confirmation bias, ignoring or misrepresenting dissenting views – are at much more common in the arguments of climate sceptics. Their behaviour is far more “cult” like than meteorologists and climate scientists, with the added spice of the conspiracy theorist. For example, he links to a website claiming that it says climate science is “complete”. It says no such thing. It does, however, say the science is clear - the climate is changing, and human activity is at least partly to blame. That still leaves lots of areas to explore – exactly how weather patterns are changing, links to the other weather phenomena Murray mentions such as El Nino etc.

Murray says “Projecting mathematical climate change models fifty and one hundred years into the future, based primarily upon weather data that has only been collected over the last few years, is fraught with danger of being grossly inaccurate.”

Happily, that is not all that climate scientists rely on. They have dozens of sources of information on climate going back hundreds, thousands and in some cases millions of years (tree rings, the writing and culture of ancient peoples, ice core samples, geology, fossil records ….)

Murray’s arguments remind me of the so-called “creation scientists” who argue that, because evolutionary scientists cannot explain how incremental evolution can produce and eye (in fact they can), we should treat evolution as just a theory with no more scientific credibility than 7-day creation.

Real science may indeed never be complete, and every theory can and should be challenged. But that in no way supports Murray's implication that there is a serious scientific argument that manmade climate change is not happening.

Having educated guesses as to what is happening to our planet is good for conversation. What we don't get to hear much on is what we can/could do collectively rather than keep putting the onus on others who really don't know much more themselves.
Reminds me of an extremely well naturally ventilated Nth Qld school when the Brisbane hierarchy decreed that all schools need to be air conditioned in communities with Diesel generator power only.

CO2 traps some radiant heat at fairly low levels due to the weight of CO2. That's not the only greenhouse gas. with a much lighter methane trapping radiant heat at a much higher level. Water vapour is by far and away the best at trapping radiant heat. One only need compare frost outcomes between a cloudy night and a clear and frosty one.

I advised (stupidity personified) coal investors, here on OLO, to get out of coal, take their losses and reinvest in lithium. Had they followed that advice then, would be laughing all the way to the bank, now. Heat on its own does little if it can escape the planet.

When it can't by being reflecting back by any of the foregoing, we get manmade climate change, and we can and should do something about that. Given, there mucho plenty money to be made in doing so!
Alan B.

What Rhian says.
Alan B.