Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill14564
When a team has had its ups and downs over many seasons then you expect that team to win a few and lose a few this season as well. If you start to notice that the team is now winning a lot more than it is losing and that this started when Tom Brady was added then it would be foolish not to take notice of that. Maybe it isn't Brady, maybe it is Gronkoski, but something out of the ordinary is happening.
The rate of warming was fairly stable for a long time before beginning to increase (warm faster) around 1850. The increase in the rate of warming may not be related to the increase of CO2. However, the strong correlation between the timing of the two and the known effect of CO2 as a greenhouse gas make it worth paying attention to.
|
Maybe. Or maybe it's just coincidence. Again, we have no other 150 year snippets to compare it with. What if the global temp and CO2 levels both rose from 7950-7800 BC twice as high as since 1850???? Does anyone know whether it did or didn't??? NOBODY does. Which is why claims of imminent disaster by zealots are unfounded.
And to use your Brady analogy (full disclosure, I am NOT a Patriots fan
), yes , they started on a streak with many more wins and losses back then. Would you have bet your life savings on the next game? So why bet $130 TRILLION on the next global warming game????