[Always Right]

Nobody can predict global temperature changes even five years ahead. There are cyclical aspects to these changes, but the cycles are so complex (with an apparent chaotic aspect), that it is simply unpredictable.

Exactly. There are hundreds of variables which have significant contributions to climate, and we are only guessing at how much each one contributes. Besides the fact that the climate data is not really all that accurate, it is impossible to isolate each variable. The idea they could conclusively say CO2 is the dominate variable effecting climate change is completely absurd and only basis is the bias of the scientific community which gets billions in research dollars to say so. No honest scientist based on the data could conclude CO2 is even a major factor, let alone a dominate factor.

[headsonpikes]

If all your posts were as succinct and accurate as this one, your FReeper name would be plus apropos.

;^)

[Hardastarboard]

They’ve been predicting rain where I live for like five days in a row now. It hasn’t shown up yet. They can’t predict the weather 24 hours in advance, with what is undoubtedly a much simpler computer model than the global warming model. Who in their right mind really believes that the global warming computer simulations have any basis in reality?

[Wissa]

and only basis is the bias of the scientific community which gets billions in research dollars to say so.

I think it may also because CO2 output is something that can readily be measured (based on the inputs of fuel purchased), leading to its usefulness as a commodity which Algore's Carbon Credit Trading scheme can make money on.