Anthropogenic Global Warming Denial

Please forgive me honorable WriterDave.In any case I will do the do. So far I have:Approximately 361 characters. "A) Carbon dioxide has three isotopes: 12C, 13C and 14C. These account for, respectively, 99%, 1%, and 1 trillionth of the CO2 in the atmosphere (14C being radioactive).Plants prefer 12C over 13C. The 13C:12C ratio in plants is about 2% lower than in the atmosphere. Burning fossil fuels, which largely consist of ancient plants, thus results in a decrease in atmospheric 13C:12C ratio, which is exactly what we have been observing since the Industrial Revolution.[1]The only known source of carbon outgassing with such a low 13C:12C ratio is volcanic activity, and human activities release about 130 times the CO2 as volcanic activity every year.[2]"First off you are obviously a very scholarly person. Second, I don't know what you are saying... Third...This is a big hunk of statements, not arguments."B) The ratio of 14C:12C, as measured in tree ring data, steadily decreased from the Industrial Revolution until after World War II, during which the amount of 14C in the air was steady (after WW2, nuclear testing increased the 14C in the air). This is clear evidence that 12C increased during this period which coincided with industrialization.[3]By how much has it increased? From 1751 until 2006, humans have emitted an estimated 329,000,000,000 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. That's 329 billion. Moreover, about half of those emissions come from the last three decades.[4]"This is merely coincidental correlation, where does this affirm humans are a major contributing factor."C) Apart from fossil fuel burning, common sense dictates another source of increased CO2: since before 1800, land clearance has resulted in dramatically fewer plants in the world, which in turn results in less carbon absorbsion, which means more CO2 in the atmosphere. This image (http://bit.ly......) shows the estimated anthropogenic carbon sources from both land clearance and fossil fuel burning since about 1750.In light of A, B and C, there is no plausible explanation for the sharp amount of CO2 increase in the atmosphere other than human activities. So, how do we know that CO2 is a significant cause of the observed global warming?"That is both a false dilemma and appeal to authority. For number C, the main problem is this:We got no klout to believe to think that just because the common sense says this slippery slope is good, it is good."D) Satellites have been observing the amount of Earth's heat escaping into space, particularly at the wavelengths at which CO2 absorbs heat. That amount has decreased.[1] Surface measurements observe heat at those same wavelengths spreading downward to the surface.[5]"Okay... You win..."E) A CO2-caused greenhouse effect would have certain consequences: for instance, that the planet would be warming faster during the night than during the day, that the stratosphere and ionosphere would be cooling, and that the tropopause (the boundary between troposphere and stratosphere) would be rising. All of these effects are presently being observed.[6][7][8][9]"Nope... Nope...I disagree, this does not prove humans nothing....Just look at me for an example... When have I ever climate changed the earth? Not once, that's right.What you are trying to say is, the human crossed the road to create global warming.But I am a denialist mind you, I refuse to believe your claims... Mostly because I don't want to.Second... Not only second but fifthly...Warming during the night is very good! How does that prove your argument? It's also best the stratosphere is cool chill bro.Green host whatever, is mostly cause by vapor from a deadly substance know as Dihydrogen Monoxide, not C02.This is because CO2 is obese.I think this is a complete overrating of global warming, which is actually good thing!!!!I have no argument!http://www.co2science.org...http://wattsupwiththat.com...