penstemo

The IPCC reports are flawed. The forcing attributed to carbon dioxide is overestimated. One important thing here is that

research indicates that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide follow warming, not the other way around. Therefore,

increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide are the effect of warming, not the cause.

Hi, I'm penstemo and I love science. My interests include, but are not limited to: botany, Odonata, Lepidoptera and ecology.

Hi, I'm penstemo and I love science. My interests include, but are not limited to: botany, Odonata, Lepidoptera and ecology.

"Global warming is a natural cycle" is a flawed argument. Even it is natural, this does not somehow explain away the issue or shield it from scientific inquiry. We should still be able to investigate the nature and source of the energy imbalance that causes temperatures to increase (or decrease). If you want to make that argument, then have a pile of scientific papers which have done that, and identified the energy source(s). The problem is that scientists have done these studies, and natural variations do not account for the warming.

If natural variations don't account for the warming then what does?