Fyyr wrote:The graph does not correlate CO2 production and global temperatures.
The graph does not even show carbon dioxide. Or other greenhouse gases. Or address any of your other quasi-religious, unscientific claims, which I don't care to rehash because they're no longer entertaining.
It's simply there to refute your claim that "there have been zero negative effects temperature wise, so far."
I know that your graph does not correlate CO2 emissions and temperatures...
That's why I stated what I said, and how I stated it.
Because there is not correlation. Temperatures were increasing prior to increased CO2 emissions. Temperatures decreased when CO2 emissions were increasing.
You don't have to address(rehash) these facts, but they are there in your own graph that you posted(the NASA graph), if you don't want to.
Like A Mage already stated about the salt flats of California(which I don't don't know what he's specifically speaking). But even he acknowledges that the climate changes, the global climate changes irrespective of human intervention or activity. And is getting hotter enough to cause supposed salt flats in California.
The entire Sierras are still covered in SNOW. Right now. Some of you contest this as only some small local event. This is August, there is snow on the Sierras, right now. In the 35 years of my adult life, I don't remember anything like this. Dismiss it as some 'local' climate thing if you like; but if your Venus/Greenhouse model were correct, this should NOT be happening right now.
There have been, and there's a concise statement of the proof.
There is no correlation between CO2 emissions and temperatures.
You stated that yourself.
"The graph does not correlate CO2 production and global temperatures."
You know as well as I do, that CO2 emissions do not match that graph in any shape, manner, or form.