None of your above OPINIONS are proven. Only people who see what they want to see, see temp leading CO2 the same way you saw SURFACE dust as dust in the AIR on Mars.Now wait a minute there Slick!
Deniers claim no one will give them any info, so how can you know if any info was left out or selectively picked???
Deniers are either lying about not being given the data or lying about data being left out, but either way they are lying.
Trust not him that hath once broken faith; he who betrayed thee once, will betray thee again.
- Shakespeare.
Warming and cooling have both occurred throughout the planetary record. In every example, CO2 has changed as a result of the temperature changing.
During this interglacial, we are enjoying a temperature varience of about 2 degrees and are currently smack dab in the middle of that varience.
It is apparent that it has been at least this warm and the overwhelming body of evidence suggest much warmer, during this interglacial. We are moving in halting steps toward that temperature high which is lower than any of the previous interglacial highs.
This warming is not unprecedented and not unusual.
The warming we are talking about totals 0.7 degrees across 2000 years. That is not runaway warming. It is astonishing stability. If you'd rather, we can reach back 1000 years and find that warming has produced a 0.3 degree rise to date. 8000 years shows a 1.0 degree fall.
Those are the facts left out by the AGW alarmists and those are the facts that add perspective to this debate. These facts pull the rug out from any urge to panic and that is why they are left out.
It is the AGW Proponents that need to prove their case. Those who doubt their case are not burdened with any onis in this. We only await the proof that never comes.
If you have proof, you are free to present it.
The only thing you have to base your temp claims on is PROXY data, and proxy data has been shown to be in error where it overlaps direct instrument measurement. Not only that, the proxy data comes from very limited areas of the globe so no global conclusions can be honestly drawn from the very limited data. But that doesn't stop deniers from drawing the conclusions they want in order to muddy the waters.
So instead of using science, what do you suggest?