What you gonna do, when the CO2 comes for you?

I was reading in the Telegram (Eurotrash stuff) that a big study, including some work of Oak Ridge partisans, determined that amount of CO2 emissions has been higher than expected, then jumps to the conclusion we are all dead, or some such thing. Things are, you see, worse than we thought, even though they are better.

The writer doesn't seem to see the missing assumption; rather, the paper and the green crew silently assume that higher CO2 is directly related to warmth in this era of cooling. I know pointing out this upside down thinking gets boring, but I figure if I keep pounding on the nails sticking up, it might help point out the poor carpentry.

Dr. Leo Buscaglia (he was a good touchy, feely speechifier) once told the story of his family standing outside the old man's hospital room waiting for him to die. A doctor went in to see how dad's fractured hip was doing after treatment. He came out to the group beaming and announced how well the patient was doing. Get it?

There is an online project regarding CO2 that was knocked off-line for two months by a cyber attack, better to kill the messenger I suppose. This attack silently screams much.

Anyway, this group, among other things is studying the great global warming of the middle ages.

What? There was a global warming without CO2?

Somewhere on this page will be a graph of the number of studies (in red) showing the warming period was hotter than today. Just another item to be ignored by the hip doctors. (MWP stands for Middle Ages Warming Period and CWP for Current...Check the site for the time period - just before the glacial period that is also ignored)

Also, here are the scientists reviewed, since science has become a game of how many experts one has: HERE

The obvious question is, assuming there was a MWP, how is it the early middle ages were hotter than today, since the CO2 level is higher, now?

The answer is: It can only be hotter where the CO2 assumption is wrong.

If you change the argument, you agree; then, we will look at your new syllogism, as believers will not change the conclusion. After all, there has to be some facts that support the obvious conclusion!

If you keep to the argument, you make no sense and have moved over to religious fundamentalism, in which case the rest of us will watch to see if you are going to use the government to support your religion.

I have no delusions, however, that most people will blink and move on, not understanding any of this. Nonetheless, I will just keep hammering the obvious nails while most will read articles like that in the Telegraph and think they actually say something because the missing, convenient assumption is secretly understood to be a convenient, obvious truth.