0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Do scientists resort to propaganda to defend climate change?
Say you meet a person with lung cancer. Does having lung cancer mean that they were a smoker?
Male smokers are about 23 times more likely and female smokers about 13 times more likely to get lung cancer.
Since 1950 evidence has shown that cigarette smoking is directly responsible for at least 90% of lung cancers.
Historic data clearly shows that temperature leads CO2, not the other way around, so CO2 cannot be the driver of climate change.
"Why do western countries spend more on baldness than malaria?" Because (a) most western countries eliminated malaria hundreds of years ago (b) it affects relatively few westerners who choose to travel to infected regions and (c) treatment is relatively cheap and quite effective. Unlike baldness. If the inhabitants of malarial regions spent more on baldness than malaria, we would indeed have an interesting question.
Historical data alone does not rule out whether atmospheric CO2 amplifies the naturally temperature cycles.
The problem is the expectation that diseases such as Malaria which is endemic in the 3rd world nations will be cured by the 1st world nations.