Comment Re:The other side the matter (Score 1) 782
You show some ignorance on the subject. Most importantly, scientifically it is hard to prove something without putting the numbers in. If you want to prove a correlation, you use your best theory, and compare the expected results with the measured results, and determine the accuracy of your estimate.
In this case, science has concluded that there can be only one explanation for global warming, which is the rapid accumulation of greenhouse gases in the past century. It fits the data, and there are simply no other explanations that fit the numbers.
To clarify this for you: suppose you see this climate change as part of the geological shifting of climate, for example the ice-age cycle (I hear this argument a lot). Then you must consider that timescales are important. Consider that the ice-ages occurs every 100,000 years or so, while the global warming we now see has mostly occurred in the last 50 years. That's a totally different timescale, which explains why the two are not related.
In this case, science has concluded that there can be only one explanation for global warming, which is the rapid accumulation of greenhouse gases in the past century. It fits the data, and there are simply no other explanations that fit the numbers.
To clarify this for you: suppose you see this climate change as part of the geological shifting of climate, for example the ice-age cycle (I hear this argument a lot). Then you must consider that timescales are important. Consider that the ice-ages occurs every 100,000 years or so, while the global warming we now see has mostly occurred in the last 50 years. That's a totally different timescale, which explains why the two are not related.
