On Mar 3, 10:43 pm, Mark & Juanita wrote:
On 3 Mar 2007 17:28:00 -0800, wrote:

On Mar 3, 3:00 pm, Bruce wrote:
So, if the concentration of greenhouse gases in
the atmosphere increases, the temperature will
increase until the Earth again is radiating as much
heat as is absorbed from the sun and produced
by radioactive decay and tidal friction.

Again, looking at much of the research the temperature increase _preceeds_
the CO2 increase.http://www.brighton73.freeserve.co.u...00000yrfig.htm
You claim the opposite, based on what?

Causality.

Um, FF, you *do* know what causality is, right?

Yes. The greenhouse effect is caused by the earth's atmosphere,
the effect is a surface temperature higher than it would have, absent
those gases. If you change the composition of the atmosphere,
that equilibrium temperature will change.

If so, then you
recognize that Bruce is correct in this assessment regarding past data
invalidating the idea that rise in CO2 is the causal agent for temperature
increase.

What casual process does the data he presents demonstrate? How
does it contradict the theory that the Greenhouse effect is caused by
the Earth's atmosphere, and that the dominant Greenhouse gases
are water, methane, and carbon dioxide?




Your argument would appear to be based on correlation.

Um, no, correlation would be different.

How so?


Relying on correlation without an understanding of causality
is always perilous. It is particularly inappropriate to rely
on past correlations to extrapolate from present conditions
as the present conditions are unprecedented.

Ah, so in the past, global warming preceeded increased global temperature
[OP meant global warming preceeded increased CO2]
[given that one can extrapolate data to the degree of precision being
indicated, but I digress]. However, now, since that wouldn't work for the
GW theorists, things are different.

Man, I love this theory, no matter what happens, it is true, past data is
no indication of future results.

Can you point to any time in the Earth's past when CO2 levels in the
atmosphere have risen at the presently observed rate, while at the
same time plant life has decreased at the present dramatic rate?

_Rate_ is the operant word here.

Colder than average temperatures are
indications of the truth of global warming, more snowstorms ... Where do
*I* sign up for a theory such that no matter what happens, it's right?

Just tune in to the 700 Club.

--

FF