This argument is made by cherry picking the data - showing past periods when sun and climate move together but ignoring the last few decades when the two diverge.
Here is a chart showing recent sun activity and earth warming.
View attachment 287915
OK first the "cheery pick"reference, pot meet kettle. The entire Global warming model is based on "Cherry picked" evidence and "fudged" numbers. remember the link to the 300 hacked e-mails proving FAKE data to prove Global warming. Why does any scientist need to fake data. OH I KNOW so they could get more GRANT MONEY, it's that simple.
Ya I may be 100% wrong, but I tend to side with the ..... 31,000 scientists reject global warming and say "no convincing evidence" that humans can or will cause global warming?
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.
More quotes...
This overwhelming consensus among climate experts is confirmed by an independent study that surveys all climate scientists who have publicly signed declarations supporting or rejecting the consensus. They find between 97% to 98% of climate experts support the consensus (Anderegg 2010). Moreover, they examine the number of publications by each scientist as a measure of expertise in climate science. They find the average number of publications by unconvinced scientists (eg - skeptics) is around half the number by scientists convinced by the evidence. Not only is there a vast difference in the number of convinced versus unconvinced scientists, there is also a considerable gap in expertise between the two groups.
Are you understanding my point at all?
My point is THERE IS NO CONSENSUS.
The current argument ( which is hilarious ) is how many scientists believe WHAT. Admit it that's funny. THIS LINE ESPECIALLY ..scientists (eg - skeptics) is around half the number by scientists convinced by the evidence.
No longer arguing the science BUT what scientists believe what.
IF and I say IF Gullible warming was real then there would be 100% consensus, after all, data is data, math is math - right.
And with all this doubt, still, the government is so sure they want to collect money from me. NO nothing fishy there huh.
Like I said I can match scientist to scientist, web site to web site, fancy graph to fancy graph. Here's my fancy graph.
Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released... and here is the chart to prove it | Mail Online