JFK, MLK, RFK and the Continuing Unspeakable with Regard to Global Warming Denial

[Greg Burnham]

There's less wallop in that argument than might appear. Most scientists knew the ice core samples showed CO2 rose after temperature.

The problem with global warming / climate change alarmism is that such claims are BASED ON A FALSE ASSERTION, i.e., "an assumption of catastrophic consequences" being accepted as FACT or DOGMA, as the case may be. Yet, even by your own admission, you said: "Most scientists knew the ice core samples showed CO2 rose after temperature." Well, if they knew this to be true why is there a claim being made that CO2 is driving current global warming when that is clearly impossible due to the fact that the one claimed to be the EFFECT (global warming) precedes the one claimed to be the CAUSE (rising CO2 levels)? This is inescapable logically. It is illogical to claim (all temporal restraints being equal) that any given EFFECT precedes the existence of the conditions (CAUSE) necessary to bring that EFFECT about.

However this begs the obvious question of what will happen when you have an unprecedented spike in CO2 as we do now? This is playing Russian Roulete with big stakes.

The TRUTH (as you admit) is that WE DO NOT KNOW "what, if anything" will "happen" do we? No, we do not. Moreover, your assertion that we now have an unprecedented spike in CO2 levels is without foundation. Depending on the source, CO2 levels were this high between 5 and 15 million years ago...long before humans were here with their industrial revolution to blame.

The flaw in your argument is it doesn't give due heed to the straight Greenhouse Effect that is a valid scientific phenomenon and will raise temperatures on its own as it is mostly likely presently recorded doing.

You make no sense. You attempt to come across as knowledgeable, yet what you write is gibberish. The Greenhouse Effect is real. It is not a scientific phenomenon. It is a name for a natural process that is necessary for the sustenance of life on Earth. Without it the planet would be a frozen wasteland. More than 98% of the Greenhouse Effect is a function of WATER VAPOR, the exact amount of which is a variable, and therefore unknown.

So in a way you are kind of conflating long term cooling and warming cycles with the separate phenomenon of the Greenhouse Effect. What you really have to worry about is an unnaturally influenced triggering of an out of cycle warming event that gets exacerbated by an unprecedented amount of existing CO2 that unloads trapped arctic CO2 into the atmosphere in an explosive Global Warming event.

Unfortunately the cycle timing argument doesn't get us off the hook.

Wait. Stop. The "cycle timing argument" was not mine. It was and is the "global warming alarmist's" argument--only they have it backwards, as you have already admitted. Nice bait and switch.