The Barnyard

then how do you account for the fact that Europe had its coldest winter in centuries??

this argument could go on forever.. it is a cycle..

Based on the longevity of the earth up to this point in time, coupled with my stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night...

I would make a SWAG that several years of temperature fluctuation is representative of the natural phenomenon known in the scientific community as, temperature fluctuation.

Yet Europe just had it's coldest winter in memory with hundreds dying of exposure.
Is the planet warming? Maybe,maybe not. Simply study history and note the cycles. Iceland and Greenland once had forests prompting the Vikings to settle.
Then came along the little ice age. want evidence. Study how the diets of the Viking settlers in Greenland changed. When first settled and for generations their diet was predominantly meat. As the temperature changed it steadily became more fish based. They died out/left because they refused to adopt the lifestyles of the native peoples. Europe before the Little Ice Age had a population explosion. When it started getting colder many died. Most countries adapted to crops that suited their new climate. The French took longer and while debatable some say it was the root of the French revolution
Point. If so,it is another climate cycle.
One must be skeptical because some of the current chicken little's were demanding we do something about a coming Ice Age during the 60's and 70's.

you are aware we have made some technological advancements in computers especially since the 1960s. i should know, i was there.

the use of supercomputers in conjunction with scientific record taking and the scientific method led to climate change proposals for reform. i guess those supercomputers that concur with the scientists, they were sabotaged by the secret tree hugger police to pollute the tests? we know the scientists at nasa and elsewhere, they too are in on the big conspiracy to fool the world into our new worship of mother earth

at this point you go down the rabbits hole until you find some caterpillars smoking a hookah ask them directions to the next office of "conspirators for the deity earth" ask the receptionist for a number doctor darwin will see you directly

crazy talk, just plain crazy

Carbon emissions really started to boom in the late 1930's - WW2. Why is it then, that global temperatures fell from that time period and continued to fall until the mid 1970's? And furthermore, if carbon emissions had squat to do with anything, then why was the warmest period in history 600 years before the invention of the combustion engine?

Frost warning tonight. Must be an ice age a' comin'.

I feel like I'm reading a Flannery O'Connor short story.

You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. On one hand you say that human carbon emissions correlate to global temps? But when faced with the reality that global temps actually decreased during the biggest carbon emission boom in history..... you respond by saying 'global temps fluctuate all the time.' Well which one is it? You ever actually think about what you type?

Anybody who knows anything about this topic knows that obviously there has been a net avg. global temp. increase since the Little Ice Age. But carbon emissions from man have zilch to do with it.

Any article that cites Singer and Seitz as authority isn't worth the potential toilet paper it could be written on. These guys have made a career taking private money to sell their titles in the name of doubt. They probably still accept money to deny cigarettes cause cancer. They were the first guys paid by the tobacco companies to sell scientific doubt to the public, even though legitimate scientists had already proven the link.

Another

Here is a discussion from William Nordhaus, a person cited in the WSJ piece but who is not one of the 16 signors, explaining how the WSJ piece grossly misstates his work and findings.