keith: "When you start comparing me with 'holocaust deniers, the tobacco industry, and other dregs of humanity.' I do tend to become a tad miffed"

Keith, I suspect you need to follow what I've written more carefully. To recap, I wrote: "a classic delaying charade documented here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_controversy as used by holocaust deniers, the tobacco industry, and other dregs of humanity."

Now if you are such a person that engages in artificial controversy techniques to try to delay the acceptance of human-caused global warming, then, yes, I am referring to you. Otherwise, you've gotten hold of the wrong end of the stick, and can safely de-miff.

I haven't impinged on your "right to hold an opinion" or on your right to free speech (which is what I think the really mean) in any way, and so I certainly will not be apologising on that front.

If some people are not expressing their true opinion, but instead attempting to falsely engineer the debate, as I suspect a few are, then I won't apologise to them either, because putting us all at risk in doing so does indeed make them the dregs of humanity.

Currently CO2 in our atmosphere is 385 parts per million.Of this man has added 30%.This is 107 ppm.Somehow the CO2 which man has added,absorbs is 9,346 times more energy than the rest of the gases in our atmosphere.Now pure CO2 in lab experiments will be hotter by 4 deg C after 20 minutes than ambient air.Divide 4 by 10,000 and this will give us a factor of raised temp of 0.0004 deg C.This is approx 4 ten thousandths of a degree.

The maths does not divide up to equal a logical answer!

Arjay: "The maths does not divide up to equal a logical answer!"

... because the question does not remotely make sense.

Arjay
Your ignorance of physics and chemistry is really embarrassing.
That GHG experiment was simplistic, for primary/junior high school.
To help you graduate to the next level ... the invitation still stands.

I hope Arjay was a bit tiddly when he wrote that.

Sams, you should be ashamed of yourself. You resort to the worst trick of argument: appeal to authority. It doesn't matter how many people say something is true, it doesn't make it so. Go and read the Emperor's New Clothes .. maybe you weren't allowed to read fairytales when you were a kid. If you think history has more authority, then how about coming to terms with the fact that every generation of mainstream thinkers believe they have the right model of reality ... until somebody else comes along with one that works better. How dare people talk about denialists or flat-earthers in the same breath. The people who took us out of the flat earth model were the denialists of the day.