So there's no moderation on trolls? Great, that excuses whatever I say here.

I can't believe you've just trotted out the ice-core "temperature CAUSES Co2 change" issue when I'm the one that has already raised it dozens of times on this list! D'uh! What kind of pig-headed troll are you? Do you even READ anyone else's posts here?

1. Instead of viewing this thread page by page, Click on "All"
2. Search (in your browser) for MILANKOVITCH CYCLES
3. Read the links and weep. Your precious little theory is TRUE, but totally IRRELEVANT! See New Scientist
http://tinyurl.com/lpgk2q

Temperatures ARE rising according to satellite measurements you idiot.
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/20ctrend.htm

"Global temperature 1880-2007 Annual surface temperature relative to the1951-1980 mean, based on surface air measurements at meteorological stations and ship and satellite measurements for sea surface temperature. Green bars show 95% confidence level."

Thanks for not including any *evidence* for your assertions about the IPCC statements, I can just sit here and laugh. What do the RECENT IPCC reports say? ;-) Some ancient lines emitted from some ancient report, totally laughed out of the peer-review system, is relevant to today's unanimous consensus on global warming.... how exactly?

"To the present day there is still no scientific proof that man-made CO2 causes significant global warming."
No, none at all, just every official climate think tank on the planet.
As I've told you a MILLION times, look up "Spectrometer" and "Radiative Forcing Equation" for the basis of this whole enterprise or GO AWAY!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative_forcing

Meme, intelligent people have discussions where ideas are exchanged. Trolls just repeat themselves over and again without EVER considering what other people write and are just here for their own SICK negative attention. Turn your computer off, go outside, meet a human being somewhere and say hello. It will help, believe me.

My site is better than your site. Na na nana naaaa na!
There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None. There is plenty of evidence that global warming has occurred, and theory suggests that carbon emissions should raise temperatures (though by how much is hotly disputed) but there are no observations by anyone that implicate carbon emissions as a significant cause of the recent global warming.
The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year (to the temperature of 1980). Land-based temperature readings are corrupted by the "urban heat island" effect: urban areas encroaching on thermometer stations warm the micro-climate around the thermometer, due to vegetation changes, concrete, cars, houses. Satellite data is the only temperature data we can trust, but it only goes back to 1979. NASA reports only land-based data, and reports a modest warming trend and recent cooling. The other three global temperature records use a mix of satellite and land measurements, or satellite only, and they all show no warming since 2001 and a recent cooling.
The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect.
None of these points are controversial. The alarmist scientists agree with them, though they would dispute their relevance.
The last point was known and past dispute by 2003, yet Al Gore made his movie in 2005 and presented the ice cores as the sole reason for believing that carbon emissions cause global warming. In any other political context our cynical and experienced press corps would surely have called this dishonest and widely questioned the politician's assertion

Fact 1: The pernicious meme is a decoy for the discredited “Friends of Science” a Canadian geriatric revolt of cranks, people gone “emeritus” and oil industry shills.

Fact 2: The meme has cut and pasted his tidbits of idiocy from an article written by the “Friends of Science.” Ahh.......with the exception of separating the paragraphs though when there there’s no filling in the sandwich, formatting becomes an obstacle:

http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?id=3

“A University of Calgary audit into its relationship with the climate lobby group, “Friends of Science” (FOS), reveals that in setting up two trust funds on behalf of FOS, U of C Professor Barry Cooper may have contravened Revenue Canada and Elections Canada laws - and, in diverting money to his wife and daughter, he most certainly broke rules at the University itself.

“Prof. Cooper vastly overstepped his authority in authorizing payments on behalf of FOS to public relations companies and political lobbyists - in one case dispersing more than $100,000 to the PR firm APCO Worldwide”:

http://www.desmogblog.com/university-of-calgary-audit-exposes-friends-of-science-wrongdoing

Fact 3: One should never cut and paste articles from the well known denier sites and then claim them as your own, since they are mostly voodoo science. The catatonic meme believes no one will smell a rat - his kind of rat, that moves money out of the public’s pockets, into the pockets of a chosen few.

Not content on plagiarising the “Friends of Science” article, he has now presented a “superb” piece of bulldust from no other than the Australian newspaper. Oafish, dishonest, mendacious, simply worthy of dismissal, he has now claimed David Evan’s press release as his own:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24036736-7583,00.html

Evans (who claims to be a “rocket scientist”) is known on OLO but “according to his resume, Evans has not published any peer-reviewed research papers on the subject of climate change. Evans published one paper, in 1987, but it was unrelated to climate change.”

Ladies and gentlemen - Despite his failed objectives, to find fresh blood for the fossil fool vampires, I regretfully advise it will take several tonnes of explosives to remove the lobotomized meme from this thread.

Google “mememine69” and one is presented with 2,730 hits.

Aw….but look at this….so cute…mememine69 hugging a polar bear – albeit a dead one methinks!

http://www.topix.net/member/profile/mememine69

And Jennifer Marohasy's website is his favourite.

So generous is meme that he's also provided us with a NOAA graph, “proving” that global temperatures have cooled:

http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:K0dhQnDLw0EJ:network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2009/01/31/lawrence-solomon-climate-change-s-antarctic-ruffle.aspx+mememine69+sarah+palin&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au

Well done meme. Thanks for setting us straight. Problem is (and just like the dishonest Plimer) the graph you provided relates exclusively to temperatures in the United States! Could you now provide us with a NOAA graph showing global temperatures cooling or have you scurried off to your subterranean hidey hole?

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/na.html

Preserve, protect and respect our planet.

We are debating the existence of what we can’t see, the climate crisis. The lack of this climate crisis proves the theory dead to a denier.
To a warmie, the lack of any observational climate crisis only transforms this impulsive belief to a prophecy of faith. And you warmies have the nerve to call that science? You witch burners are the new flat-earthers of science and I promise history will not be kind to you misguided and irresponsible environMENTALists.
-A policy of precaution is not science, its superstition.
-Just shy of a quarter of a century of failed IPCC predictions certainly disproves the theory.
-La Nina is stronger than all of Global Warming’s magical powers.
-Melting ice does not prove CO2 is at fault?
-Our cooling clear blue sky disproves the theory.
-10 years of NOAA cooling disproves the theory.
-Resulting cooling disproves predicted warming.

Hmm, just more evidence that debating MeMe is dealing with a conspiracy theory mindset so addicted to their pet theory that it is elevated past the level of religious belief into a kind of pathology and delusion.

Let me illustrate in another genre.

THERE WAS NO MOON LANDING, STOP FREAKING OUT MY KIDS ABOUT MEN ON THE MOON because there’s no evidence there ever was a moon landing!

We are debating the existence of what we can’t see, the moon landing. The lack of return visits to the moon in over 23 years of so called “space flight” proves that we cannot get to the moon. This proves the theory dead.

To a “moonie”, the lack of any observational moon data transforms this impulsive belief to a prophecy of faith. And you moonies have the nerve to call that science? You witch burners are the new flat-earthers of science and I promise history will not be kind to you misguided and irresponsible MOONists.
-A policy of precaution about the moon is not science, its superstition.
-Just shy of a quarter of a century of failed moon landings certainly disproves the theory.
-Gravity seems stronger than rocket’s magical powers.
-Melting rockets on the launch pad proves the theory is at fault.
-10 years of NO MORE LAUNCHES proves that it is fault.
-THERE, IT IS ALL PERFECTLY PROVEN FAULTY YOU MOONIES, THERE’S NO MOON LANDING BECAUSE I SAID SO 20 DIFFERENT WAYS AND ALL YOUR LINKS TO “SCIENCE” AND “HISTORY” AND YOUR SO CALLED “WEBSITES” ARE JUST MOONIES YOU MOONIE MORONS!

PS: MeMe, if you want to SEE global warming then watch this video. Half way SHOWS what Co2 can do to the heat energy from a candle! This is a repeatable, demonstrable test that can be run in a lab again and again and again....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6Un69RMNSw&feature=sdig&et=1246419220.11