I have been waiting for a group of experts to step up and do just that for the past 15 years. Who and Where are they?
I didn't record which FReeper posted this....
https://www.opednews.com/populum/page.php?f=opedne_daniel_g_070207_global_warming_3a_the_.htm
https://archive.fo/T5OLa
Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide - Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts? By Timothy Ball No Smoking Hot Spot (The Australian)
Those two articles take Greenhouse Theory at face value and by the criterion set up in the theory itself finds no evidence of warming on the basis of greenhouse effect.
https://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/28/sky-high-hole-blown-in-agw-theory/
"Forbes reports on a peer-reviewed study that uses NASA data to show that the effects of carbon-based warming have been significantly exaggerated. In fact, much of the heat goes out into space rather than stay trapped in the atmosphere, an outcome that started long before AGW alarmists predicted:"
That article explains why no Hot Spot has been found.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2010/02/the_hidden_flaw_in_greenhouse.html
http://www.schmanck.de/FalsificationSchreuder.pdf
Harvard astrophysicist dismisses AGW theory, challenges peers to 'take back climate science' Seminole County Environmental News Examiner ^ | May 11, 2010 | Kirk Myers Posted on 5/15/2010, 2:23:07 PM by hugorand
In the following interview, Dr. Willie Soon, a solar and climate scientist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, questions the prevailing dogma of man-made global warming and challenges his peers to “take back climate science.” His remarks are his personal opinion based upon 19 years of scientific research.
Examiner.com: What drives climate change on Earth?
Dr. Soon: Most of the weather and climate variations we observed are essentially related to the sun and the changing seasons – not by CO2 radiative forcing and feedback. The climate system is constantly readjusting naturally in a large way – more than we would ever see from CO2. The CO2 kick [impact of CO2 emissions] is extremely small compared to what is happening in a natural way. Within the framework of a proper study of the sun-climate connection, you don’t need CO2 to explain anything.
Examiner.com: What is your opinion of the anthropogenic (man-caused) global warming theory?
Dr. Soon: It’s never been about the science – even from the very beginning. It’s based on confusion and a mixture of ideology. We should deal only in the facts that we do know.
Examiner.com: Many of the scientists promoting the global warming theory appear to be driven by politics rather than hard scientific data. What are your thoughts?
Dr. Soon: I am a scientist. I go where the facts take me. And the facts are fairly clear. It doesn’t take very long to discover that their views [of man-caused global warming] aren’t grounded in the facts. Why would any solid science need so much promotion and advertisement and the endless shouting about how the science has all been “settled”? And now we’re supposed to believe that the growing consensus on the street that humans are not responsible for global warming is due mainly to the...
http://miltonconservative.blogspot.com/2010/03/simple-chemistry-and-real-greenhouse.html
Those four articles each show that Greenhouse Theory itself has no basis in reality due to a direct conflict with the known laws of physics. No wonder the smoking gun "hotspot" can't be found.
http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf
That article kills any thought of planetary warming from any cause. Think about it. If there is absolutely no sign of an acceleration of sea level rise how could the planet be warming? The rise in sea level in the last 100 years is far less than the average over the last 18,000 years caused by the inter-glacial period we are in.