If scientists knew how to explain the pose since 12000a and if the IPCC made correct forecasts, this subject would not exist!
It is not up to the iec-ers to decide whether debates and information are compatible with their blind liver or to affirm that nature has no influence on the climate, the time of the inquisition is over!
Barking also advances the debate, and it's not over with the rest.
The anthropogenic IPCC and me.
The multiplication of vehicle radiators is anthropogenic. Information makes opinion:
The bludgeoning of the anthropogenic causes us to forget that the natural also causes warming, as demonstrated by the past, and cooling which thwarts the warming.
Anthropogenic warming is well known enough for everyone to adapt my thoughts to their beliefs.
Despite the explosion of CO2 since 50y there was a pause at the beginning of the century and several declines before. If there are already feedbacks, why should these feedbacks, or something else, no longer act in the future?
When we look at the correlation with the temperature we notice that for the last cooling there is an amplitude of 10° for 70ppm, whereas with the explosion of CO2 of 200ppm the temperature only rose by 8°, it should already be 3 times more important logically (8+16°), the IPCC invokes inertia.
The natural cyclic temperature should already be 2° higher.
While apologizing for its poor forecasts, the IPCC does not guarantee an improvement.
Steam is the main responsible for the warming of the Earth, 60% for some, from 70 to 85% for the realists, 88% with my calculation. How can we make predictions with such uncertainty.
Distrust also with state lies when money is at stake. For example the Bush administration's hundreds of lies and false evidence on Iraq to increase oil profits, without any sanction for the hundreds of thousands of deaths.
https://www.bfmtv.com/societe/les-mensonges-qui-ont-change-le-cours-de-l-histoire-les-supposees-armes-de-destruction-massive_AN-202108130001.html