late wrote:You are claiming without evidence
while actual scientists (NASA, in this case) have a ton of evidence.
And when the evidence doesn't support their interpretation, they change the evidence rather than their interpretation of it.
IOW, you need a better explanation, or a counterexample. You have neither, just a lame claim based on nothing.
That is just false. The better explanations -- natural cyclical variations, especially in solar activity -- have already been provided, and the counterexamples are legion.
This was predicted a long time ago, it was observed a half century ago, and nothing, and I mean nothing, has offered a challenge of any significance to it..
Again, that is just false:
1. Angstrom showed that Arrhenius was wrong 100 years ago because adding CO2 to standard atmospheric air typically found near the earth's surface does not significantly alter its infrared transmissivity.
2. Solanki et al showed in 2004 that solar activity during the 20th century warming period was the highest in several millennia. It was also the lowest in several millennia during the coldest 500-year period in the last 10,000 years. AGW screamers would have you believe, absurdly, that this is mere coincidence.
3. The paleo record shows CO2 follows temperature, not the other way around.
4. The island nations that were predicted to disappear due to rising sea level have not done so, and have in fact grown.
5. Arctic sea ice extent bottomed in 2012, and has grown since then.
6. Anyone can look out their own window and confirm for themselves that those who claim there is some sort of climate "crisis" or "emergency" are just flat-out lying.