To those who don't believe AGW is real

[sasguru]

will take a look when I have time / nothing better to do and deliver a stunning riposte.

.

Given the quality of your previous postings on the topic I doubt it.
Given your previous form, I expect some random, irrelevant statement backed up with links that totally contradict your point

[sasguru]

Here's some of that there science for sasguru:

(Temperature Increase = F(C2) - F(C1) where F(c)=Ln (1+1.2c+0.005c^2 +0.0000014c^3) and c is the concentration in ppm).

Your point being?

[Mailman]

But that's like writing your own References!

Oh! sorry sas

Peow peow guru



Mailman

[sasguru]

Peow peow guru



Mailman

Shut it you asinine idiot
Come on you sceptics, you can do better than this moron.
I'm sure there must be some serious flaws in the AGW case - I haven't heard any credible ones yet

[ace00]

Raw data can be analysed here:
http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps...g_Proxies.html
And here:
http://www.surfacestations.org/

Perhaps agw proponents would care to analyse the data and make a positive contribution to the argument?

[Diver]

Global warming has stopped

Fact

[TykeMerc]

With the risk of sounding especially stupid what does the AGW acronym stand for?

[sasguru]

Raw data can be analysed here:
http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps...g_Proxies.html
And here:
http://www.surfacestations.org/

Perhaps agw proponents would care to analyse the data and make a positive contribution to the argument?

They have. See my first post. Unless you can point to something in your links that contradicts the Royal Society report.

[sasguru]

Global warming has stopped

Fact

That site features Henry Svensmark and Martin Durkin whose work has already been discredited.

http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2007...-with-science/

Next!

[sasguru]

Note to sceptics:

1. Try not to post links to sites that are run by cranks and/or blatant propaganda sites by the oil industry.
2. Try not to use simplistic arguments that can be refuted by anyone with O-level knowledge.
3. Try not to rehash old chestnuts that have been debunked ad nauseum.
4. Try not to post meaningless random links.

I suggest you go through the Royal Society paper and take each argument they say is misleading and explain why it might be true.