[mh8782]

Not if global warming theory is correct. Studying paleoclimate can give us clues into how things may change, but it's not especially relevant to predicting would happen if CO2 levels were to double in such a short space of time (100-200 years)

[Wonder Warthog]

"Not if global warming theory is correct. Studying paleoclimate can give us clues into how things may change, but it's not especially relevant to predicting would happen if CO2 levels were to double in such a short space of time (100-200 years)"

The point you're missing is that in the past, the CO2 level has ALSO been higher (in some cases MUCH higher) than it is today. The rate of change means zip. What matters is the concentration in the atmosphere.

[DustyMoment]

Not if global warming theory is correct.

There's just one troubling aspect to the GW theory. If we believe that man-made greenhouse gas emissions are the root cause of GW, how does it explain why the Martian polar ice caps are melting? Who's driving SUV's on Mars?

[Almondjoy]

They double instantly some from of the greatest volanic eruptions the earth has seen.

[kidd]

The present warming trend began before the start of the industrial revolution.

The warming preceded the recent increases in atmospheric CO2.

The oceans are a great reservoir of CO2. When they warm up, they cannot hold as much CO2 (outgassing).

The warming that has increased CO2 levels, not the other way around.