![]() |
|
| The Debate Forums | Blogs | | | Donate | Register (it's free) | Chatroom | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||||
|
| | Thread Tools |
| | #1 (permalink) (top) |
| Molten Ash Posts: 41 | GW research files http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/pdf/TAR-12.PDF http://isam.atmos.uiuc.edu/atuljain/...iJain03GBC.pdf These 2 studies were sponsored by Exxon, if anybody could give them a look and let me know what they think i would appreciate it i admit, some of them speak over my head |
| | |
| | #2 (permalink) (top) |
| don't care Location: NY Posts: 267 | From the graphs I looked at. There was one with 400,000 years of time compared with carbon dioxide ppm. The ppm was at the peak of the last peak in 400,000 years. But wait! The temperature fluctuations 400,000 years ago peaked at 8 C . The problem is that the peak we have is at .8C! Carbon dioxide obviously isn't causing a temperature change. I'm just a fool caught in the rat race of life (Nathan Struth) please help me solve world hunger, It's hard to do it alone. |
| | |
| | #3 (permalink) (top) |
| Igneous Magma Posts: 687 | Go figure that an oil comany would say CO2 doesn't cause global warming. How about the hundreds of other studies that say it does? NAH, Exxon wouldn't write a biased report to another oil baron to protect billions in profits would it? Say it isn't SO! Big Jr is watching you! |
| | |