On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 20:05:49 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article wrednUseBPwWv-3FnZ2dnUU7-
,
says...

On 2017-01-06 17:20, Eric Stevens wrote:

There is no dispute about that. There is dispute about the cause.
There is considerable pressure to blame it all on mankind and one of
the techniques that is used is to attempt to minimise the historical
temperature variation. Denying the existence of the Medieval, Roman
and Minoan warm periods is but one of the techniques.

Nobody denies their existence - they question that they are relevant to
what has happened over the past 200 years.

If you look at the population change and carbon emissions over the
history of mankind on the planet, to not ascribe a significant amount of
atmospheric warming to human emissions over the past 2 centuries is
nothing short of willful ignorance.

Not only has the industrial age allowed economies to flourish, but also
enabled the population to explode. The same 200 years of emissions
output correspond to human population exploding from less than 1B to
over 7B. All while using carbon emitting fuels like there was no
tomorrow. (oops).

The naysayers desperately search for those warm periods in the past
while ignoring rate-of-change over short periods as we've experienced
over the last century as CO2 and other gases buildup. Now with
permafrost failure in the north, massive amounts of methane are leaking
and it is a far worse GH gas than CO2 - the feedback effect will simply
accelerate things. Of course those deniers will point to that as a
"natural cause" while ignoring the system that exposed all that
permafrost locked gas in the first place. Such is human folly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUwm...ature=youtu.be
Puts the human population aspect clearly as a function of time.

And a few years down the road the glaciation
trigger will be pulled and everybody will be
wishing for the global warming back.

The Russians consider we may be heading for another mini-ice-age

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens