Resolved: Co2 Theory is false.

Ok, first off a resolve clarification for its only the 2nd round. The Co2 Theory implies man-made greenhouse effects, not natural. Moving on. "1) The CO2 theory has adequate scientific evidence and reason behind it and therefore should be looked to as fact. Experiments conducted by the US government and many independent scientists, such as George Simpson and Richard Lindzen have shown that CO2 absorbs radiation, which is basically heat." My opponent has missed one big point of this experiment. The experiment was only done on a small scale. Lindzen even said himself it can't be applied totally to the Co2 Theory in that his evidence does not apply to a size of that of Earth. "a) The unique way the Earth works is that the sun's heat enters the atmosphere, travels down and hits the surface. Then, most of the radiation is reflected back into space. However, while is it reflected, it goes though several layers of the atmosphere, and at each layer some of the heat being reflected back is absorbed into the atmosphere and either remains in that layer, or is radiated back to the surface of the Earth. If more CO2 is added into the atmosphere, then more heat is absorbed per layer, and less energy is radiated back into space." This is not proven, as I pointed out in Lindez's arguments. If it were actually true then why is it that time-periods in the earth's temperature record have been hotter with less Co2 admission. "Now every argument that is against the CO2 theory does not attack this, they are only used to attack other factors concerning the CO2 theory. If this empirical evidence cannot be refuted, then there is no clear disproving of the CO2 theory, and therefore we should look to the negative for this debate." My opponent is making an A Priori without any truth to it. The arguments I have posed are in direct correlation to what my opponent is saying. My opponent says that I need empirical evidence. Look at my case, I've already provided it. "b) 250 million years ago, there was a huge extinction of many species of animals, plants, and life. Known as the "great dying". Recent evidence found by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)shows that the global temperature increased by about 10 degrees at that time,which would interrupt life processes and cause this "great dying". They have also found that the CO2 levels around that time had increased dramatically, probably due to an increase in volcanic activity." This only affirms my side. The process is NATURAL, NOT MAN-MADE. "In response to my opponents first contention, I would first like to say that IT DOES NOT DISPROVE THE CO2 THEORY. It simply states that there have been some periods of warming and cooling in the past that were not caused by an increase in the level of CO2, and could be caused by another factor." My Response: Exactly, looking at empirical evidence, time-periods have been hotter then they are now. Human Co2 is therefore NOT DOING IT. "Secondly I would like to point out that my opponent seems to be leaning toward an argument trying to disprove man-made global warming, whereas here we are debating the CO2 theory." My Response: Thats the point of this debate. Is the Co2 theory real or not. the Co2 Theory is the theory that man-made Co2 has disrupted a balance and therefore responsible for Global Warming. "As a third response I would like to offer a graph, shown in a link below that depicts the warming and cooling trends for the past 1200 years, presented by the NOAA(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). This graph shows that the temperature for the past 1200 years has been highest in the 20th and 21st century, where CO2 levels have risen greatly due to man's emissions." Lol ok, then I'll provide the medieval warm period (Time with no man-made Co2 Emissions and its the hottest time in the past 1000 years.) http://www.trendlines.ca... Also, the Holocene Period, the hottest in the past 10,000 years was not hot because of human-Co2 emissions. Its because of a natural cause. You can affirm right here on the fact my opponent has not explained how the hottest times in history have absolutely no human Co2 emissions. He then says its "other factors" i.e. natural reasons. Not enough scientific evidence has come out proving that human Co2 has caused global warming. The scale leans towards the pro.