[Beetle01]

I dont refuse to discuss anything, we've been "arguing" on this topic for weeks now. I also never said that everyone who disagrees with me is getting paid by the fossil fuel industry, but several of the people you mentioned in your sources are, so I just pointed that out. Also, Im not being "liberally brainwashed" stop watching fox, and wake up to the real world, just because someone has different views than you doesn't make them brainwashed. You used several sources in this thread, and almost every other thread you posted in that comes direct from right wing think tanks. Stop being hypocritical.

And the people who it's it is not due to human activity have a lot to gain, for the people in the fossil fuel industry, their future relies on it. A huge push to make this country more "green" or environmentally friendly is not good business for them. There are things to gain no matter which side your own.


You also say that my data is innacurate, and I wont debate that there are flaws in every study, it always happens, but when you use crap like this to deny global warming, I just have to laugh.

This comes from one of your links.

The reason that global CO2 levels rise and fall in response to the global temperature is because cold water is capable of retaining more CO2 than warm water. That is why carbonated beverages loose their carbonation, or CO2, when stored in a warm environment. We store our carbonated soft drinks, wine, and beer in a cool place to prevent them from loosing their ‘fizz’, which is a feature of their carbonation, or CO2 content. The earth is currently warming as a result of the natural Ice Age cycle, and as the oceans get warmer, they release increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

http://english.pravda.ru/science/earth/106922-2/

If you want me to pick apart this crap then I will, but you can just try talking to anyone else who paid attention in High school chemistry and they can tell you why this is completely wrong.

All I can do is laugh. Honestly beetle, if you cant do better than that, just stop. That crap has no scientific significance, its a joke, just like most of your arguments.

Then pick it apart. All that is is a layman's terms explanation that the common person can understand, although I highly doubt you read anything in the article other than that one paragraph in which you drew your conclusion.