I repeat -
"It's just weird on a board that is not only about expertise in reading actual data and graphs but about the discipline of not allowing extraneous noise interfere with cold hard logic and avoiding what your emotions know as certainty. Its really off-key to what the dominate thought-processes that this forum seems to be about and wants to convey."
What is weirder is you think you're the one talking sense...with your appeal for sticking to rational thought and facts.
"Actual data" argues that CO2 is NOT the cause of global warming, but the result of warming.
There have been MANY times the CO2 in the atmosphere in the past than now -- including during ice ages.
There is "actual data" that strongly supports the premise that SUN CYCLES and SOLAR ACTIVITY produces warming/cooling....on this planet (and the rest in the solar system that warmed at the same time) -- not .0038ths of the earth's atmosphere (CO2).
Yes we have had warming, coming our of a mini ice age ending about 1870 or so.
The rest here is a discussion of the false religion of AGW and the dishonesty of it's prophets -- plus how badly the models have proven to be.
The e-mail attack is against Michael Mann, best known for his "hockey stick" which is representative of global warming; some would say unprecedented rapid global warming (an issue put to bed by former skeptic Richard Muller's BEST study - one of those very rare skeptics that actually has a PhD and does research in a field of inquiry relevant to the issue; not some non-credential former TV weatherman).
But that's not what you addressed.
Instead, you retreat to the "it's not CO2." One would think that after being so obviously wrong about the presence of rapid global warming, you all would be a little bit more humble in now making your certain assertions about its cause. That is, however, not so much off key here on this forum - folks irrationally wedded to market positions are pretty much a dime a dozen.
"retreat to it's not CO2"??? That has been the foundation to most respected skeptics all along. Why, because EVERY action by the AGW crowd -- governments especially -- to stall/fix global warming has been about CO2 -- PERIOD.
I didn't retreat, I never left. The point IS that ALL AGW "campaigns" are not based on Methane and water vapor -- or any combination of the "potent" greenhouse gases -- just CO2.
As for the disdain for the Hockey Stick being put to bed by Muller, and the BEST study, that is absolutely false. He NEVER recanted his criticism of Mann's Hockey Stick.
In fact -- in no way -- did BEST include ANY consideration of "proxy data" (the basis for the Hockey Stick) -- at all. He did not include ocean, ice, tree rings, et al, in any way.
BEST was all about modern surface data -- (again, period). Yes, Muller changed from someone who thought there was NO global warming (something I never believed). In BEST, he came to believe the SURFACE TEMP studies that showed .8 C increase over 50 years. He also -- with the disclaimer that sensor data was very scant -- concluded that it has risen 1.2 C over 250 years.
Muller -- outside of the BEST study -- has said he believes that it is AGW.
BUT -- Muller makes no claim (I ever saw) that focuses on any specific gas...including C02. The "to come" extension of the BEST study may get into the examination of specific CAUSES since looking at potential mitigation is a stated focus for the further work. I do know that Muller has stated that the focus needs to be on the true polluters, like China and India -- concluding that any pointed focus on the US (THE focus all AGW attacks) would have little effect.
It is important to note that Muller clearly stated -- SINCE the latest release of BEST -- ""Much, if not most, of what is attributed to climate change is speculative, exaggerate, or just plain wrong"".