What is the cause of climate change based on the greenhouse gas theory?

Swan wrote:LOL everyone is 3 people max.

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Carleto wrote:First, lets make it diametrically clear that I am an absolute believer in man-made climate change

Do you believe that it all essentially began at Spindletop? Do you think perhaps M2C2 (man-made climate change) will cause rain to fall up and the sky to "burst"?

Carleto wrote: but not by CO2

Can we rule out gravity as the cause?

Carleto wrote:I have found in my personal understanding of myself that I am not prefect,

@ Into the Night, I really think mantra 6 should be slightly readjusted to "6) Feigning partnership and/or common ground" and then broken out, with this one being "Feigning Humility", i.e.

6) Feigning partnership and/or common ground
a) Offer to Work Together
b) Insincere Desire to Work Through the Math
c) Average Joe, pretending to represent the typical rational individual
d) Feigning Humility (opposite of bulverism)

It really doesn't happen enough to do that. Should it become more a common mantra, I'll consider it.

I'd like to address this topic again. This fallacy is exceedingly common. "Skeptics" such as Earthling-1, Pete Rogers, et. al. always come on heavy with the "I'm on your side" and "rally around me" just to get others to blindly support whatever they happen to be preaching. I have been posting on the Danish mirror site lately and when I started, there were quite a few "skeptics" who insisted that I should get on board with "the team" and not be questioning greenhouse effect, but instead should be focused on showing that its not catastrophic. Of course, I am stupid for questioning the Little Ice Age that formed the Denmark terrain that we have today. The initial "offer to work together" is the standard tact for applying pressure to get others to "join the team" which means "just support me, don't question me." You've seen how viscously they attack when they are questioned or otherwise required to support their positions.


Also, it would be value-added if you could find a way to work in another very common fallacy that we normally don't even think about: "Proof by Trivia." This is where pieces of trivia are tossed into the discussion just like meaningless buzzwords as though they prove the argument. In the context of Global Warming, warmizombies are forever posting "record breaking heat temperatures" and summer time heat maps while "skeptics" are forever posting record-breaking cold temperatures and cold weather trivia. We've all seen this from day one, ... but over on the Danish mirror site there is an example that is on its fifth thread which has over 80 pages ... of nothing but terribly boring weather trivia. I have asked on several occasions what point is being made, but I am ignored. It's a total waste of bandwidth, but the trivia gets piled on with extreme determination to falsify some opponent's unfalsifiable (and often unstated) dogma.

Please, 3 trillion words or less.

IBdaMann wrote:

Into the Night wrote:Sounds like Moon and a couple of others over on JPP. I've been coming across some other new mantras as well, including certain types of insults that keep reappearing.

Yeah. I should address these.

I highly recommend to everyone a read of these two latest posts (you'll have to translate from Danish) to get a full appreciation for desperation enough to reach for the most boring of trivia to prove a point that cannot even be vaguely expressed much less clearly specified.

https://www.klimadebat.dk/forum/part-10-opdaterede-sol-is-temp-hav-data-d12-e3432-s3200.php#post_89235