>>12037140>1. Showing CO2 and temperature on a geological timescale is relevant because it shows the relationship has no correlation.This doesn't respond to what I said. How is lack of correlation on geological timescales relevant to global warming?
>Short term correlations tell us nothing.Global warming is a long term trend. Smaller timescale than geological timescale doesn't mean "short term."
>A lack of correlation proves there is no relationship between temperature and CO2.It doesn't, as I already explained. You haven't controlled for other factors, so this tells you nothing. Not to mention that the greenhouse effect is directly observed.
>The graph is based on fossil evidenceThis doesn't respond to anything I said.
>Global warming is empirically observable because the UN will only fund scientists who affirm Global Warming. The UN doesn't fund thermometers, my special friend.
>56 million years ago the earth was 10 degrees Celsius hotter.And? 56 million years ago, humans didn't exist.
>Earth has been cooling because the Sun is slowly dyingBut that's wrong, retard. The Sun is getting hotter as it ages. And this has no affect on the timescale we're talking about anyway.
>The temperature of Earth shows strong correlations to the solar period.Pic related.
You have utterly failed to argue against anything I said.
