The temperature graph is illegible. Not sure what the blue line is supposed to represent, but it is up overall, although slightly down from its position in the middle of the graph. Is this supposed to prove something?

Lonny copied the top graph from NOAA, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, who scientifically collected and analyzed the data. Their conclusion: our current climate change is likely human caused.

Lonny would have us all believe that he is better at analyzing NOAA's data than the climate scientists with the PhD's that NOAA employs. Why didn't NOAA reach the same conclusions as Lonny? Could it be that Lonny is incorrect? No, warns Lonny, the reason NOAA's scientists reached the conclusion that current climate change is likely human caused is because they belong to an international conspiracy of scientists and politicians aligned to create a single global government that will steal your money and your freedom through the use of carbon credits.

Of course Lonny doesn't bother detailing why American scientists would do such a thing to themselves and other Americans and he doesn't bother to cite any peer reviewed science backing up his "alternative" claims, only his opinions on the subject. Lonny has been asked since October, 2007 on the forums of the Auburn Journal to cite just one example of peer reviewed science to back up his claims and he has been unable to do so. Why? According to Lonny and his "believers" the absence of peer reviewed science that reaches the conclusion that climate change is not human caused is proof that the scientific conspiracy exists!

Perhaps it could be just what it appears to be, more indication that our current climate change is likely human caused.

The idea that the US will be made slaves to carbon credits is laughable and almost as bizarre as the assertion of a scientific conspiracy to hide the "truth" regarding climate change. Lonny neglects to mention that the concept of "pollution credits", very similar to the concept of "carbon credits", has been in use by the EPA since the 1970's as one tool in the arsenal to combat acid rain in the US. The fight against acid rain continues with more reliance on "emissions trading" or pollution credits as a primary motivator to get large polluters to stop excessive polluting. See the 1990 Clean Air Act , title V for more information on this market based pollution credit system.

Forcing polluters to pollute less will definitely have its costs. I, personally, am not a big fan of "carbon credits" or "pollution credits", and there are many who believe that these systems do not produce enough of the desired outcome (less pollution) when compared to the cost of implementing and managing the programs. And there are others who believe that a "carbon credit" trading program is the most efficient means of limiting carbon pollution. But we are talking about solving the problem, a problem that Lonny doesn't admit even exists. A problem that Lonny insists is manufactured by a conspiracy of elitist international scientists and politicians as a means to force single government rule on the world and to annihilate the US economy and the freedoms of our people.

For now, my money is on the climate scientists and their scientific reports. They seem, to me, to be more reliable sources of information regarding climate change than Lonny's "world domination" conspiracy theory based explanation that contains absolutely zero peer reviewed science.

Bastiat: Since you fraudulently claim "the assertion of a scientific conspiracy to hide the "truth" regarding climate change." your entire rant can be dismissed as based on a false premise.

I am showing data. Why are you so afraid of it?

The upper chart shows CO2 increasing annually with no declines.

The lower chart shows global temperature over the last 20 years with a significant decline starting around 8 years ago. The blue line is an averaging function showing the downward trend.

As for the quality of the pictures, thank the Journal for resizing them to oblivion but you can still get the drift...if your religious faith allows it.

And as for why the IPCC has not embraced this data sufficiently to change their perspective on human-caused global warming...there are many possible reasons, but the most likely is that they will take years to come to that conclusion. Give them time.

Have another cup of warm koolaid now.

Lonny - dismiss what you wish...it should be a very familiar way of life for you by now...dismissing the truth. You have consistently said on these boards that you are opposed to the idea of anthropogenic climate change because it is your opinion that there is a conspiracy to create one world government and that the climate change issue was invented by these conspiracy forces as a means to redistribute wealth and power from the haves to the have nots via carbon credits. I am not making this up. You said it. You, apparently, believe it.

The part about the conspiracy you are making up.

I tend to believe it is just a bunch of people who have the same world view attempting to bring it to fruition. I do not believe they smoke cigars in a dark room and plan it all out.

Repeat: Since you failed to address the obvious..

The upper chart shows CO2 increasing annually with no declines.

The lower chart shows global temperature over the last 20 years with a significant decline starting around 8 years ago. The blue line is an averaging function showing the downward trend.

conspiracy is not defined as sitting in a dark room and smioking cigars.

no reputable scientific organization that supports the theory of anthropogenic climate change has ever said that climate change will cause temperature to continuously rise everywhere in the world unabated. this idea is your straw man. this concept is not cited in any of the scientific literature on the subject as an indicator of anthropogenic climate change. it is logically and scientifically irrelevant to the argument regarding the existence of anthropogenic climate change.

even the fool believes he is clever.

If Mr. Bastiat was really interested in getting to the truth of the matter he might read:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/11/07/truly-inconvenient-truths-about-climate-change-being-ignored-ipccs-pachauri-says-warming-is-taking-place-at-a-much-faster-rate/