Global warming is nothing more than a natural warming cycle, and not is due to CO2 emissions.

Thanks for continuing. You seem to have a firm grasp of the skeptical side of the argument. Since there are several claims to refute, I'm going to reply to each refutable claim one by one. Any of my claims can be referenced to "An Inconvenient Truth" or www.climatecrisis.net. If you feel this is not a credible source, there are plenty of scientific journals on google scholar you can look up that support the same theories. llamallama : "look at the bottom graph on page six, which is the average temperature from 1895-2007. Not only do I not see the temperature rising too far above normal, I see it falling sharply around today. This is in complete contradiction to your claim that the earth is warming and that it is different then it has been." - Though the average global temperature may not have risen too far above normal, the concern is how average temperatures differ at different locations on the planet. While the temperature may have stayed the same, or even dropped in certain locations, the average temperatures in the coldest regions of the world have risen at an alarming rate. The proof of this can be seen, not only in recorded temperatures by climatologists, but in the way that glaciers and ice caps have decreased significantly in size. In fact, the largest ice sheet in the Arctic Circle has broken in half. llamallama : "Now go to page 7 of the link. There you see that CO2 and temperature have no link." - The oil industry spends billions of dollars annually on lobbying and advertising campaigns aimed at making global warming appear as a non-issue. It isn't hard for scientists who are funded by the oil industry to make a compelling case to the layman with evidence that contradicts the findings of the global academic community. There is ample evidence that shows the two are indeed directly related. llamallama : "The sun can have a big influence on the earth's temperature and it has been more active lately as proved by page 3 of my link." - The Earth's temperatures are directly related to energy provided by the sun. This is commonly known. Though solar activity fluctuates from time to time, this increase in activity as stated has been more active lately. The warming period in question takes place on a much larger time frame than the increases in solar activity are occurring. llamallama : "There have been many times in which the world has worried over a global cooling. In 1895 the New York Times was reporting an apocalyptic story, not on global warming, but on global cooling saying "Geologists Think the World May Be Frozen Up Again". Later, in the 1920's the earth warmed by half a degree and the New York Times started talking of an apocalyptic warming. Then, in 1975, the New York Times reported that "A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable." The cover of Science News showed a worrying picture of the earth being enveloped by ice and many people panicked. Now, its reporting warming again and this time its different? I don't think so. It is not just the Times that has spread global warming, in 1975 Newsweek worried that the earth was cooling dramatically." - There's a major difference between what a hand full of people thought in the period between the late 1800s and 1975 and what the global academic community is claiming. In addition to a global consensus, the science of today is far more advanced than in earlier periods. llamallama : "Everyone is taking minor temperature changes as apocalyptic predictions. (http://www.geocraft.com......) Here it says water vapor is responsible most for the greenhouse effect and most other sources are natural. In the medevil warm period, people were able to grow grapes in England and they can't grow grapes there today. Not to mention we are just recovering from the Little Ice Age, which may explain why we feel a bit warm." - Water vapor is a key component to the greenhouse effect, which is a key component of our global climate, and is therefore a good thing. When the greenhouse effect is intensified to the point that it traps more infrared radiation than it's supposed to is when it becomes a problem. The intensification of the greenhouse effect is caused by a consistent worldwide flow of CO2 emission into the atmosphere. It is true that the vast majority of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere is from natural sources, but A) this is where the difference between chronic vs acute mentioned in my round 1 argument comes into play, and B) much of the emitted CO2 and other pollutants form natural sources is in the form of particulate matter, which actually causes global dimming of the sun, and serves to cool the planet. There's a great PBS documentary about global dimming called "The Dimming of the Sun" that can most likely be accessed online which I would recommend to anyone that would like to improve their understanding of the climate crisis. llamallama : "The arctic ocean, which if the ice is melting, should be falling, is rising according to Europe's Space Agency's ERS-2 satellite" - This statement is false. If the ice is melting, then it would cause the sea level in the Arctic Ocean to rise, much like cubes of ice dropped into a glass of water will cause the water level to rise in the glass. llamallama : "Even the hockey stick graph, which is used to prove global warming is scientifically invalid." - Which hockey stick graph would you be referring to?