, Maddus Mattus wrote

@evildictaitor: You assume it has been proven, it has not,.

Since does not prove anything. Science is not in the business of proving this or that statement.

Science is the discipline of coming up with models that fit existing data to make predictions of the future, and refining the models so that predictions become more accurate.

If you have a better model as to how the climate works that meets both the experimental model of physics that describes our atmosphere and fits the historical data on the climate and makes useful predictions that can be tested and your model makes more accurate predictions in experiments, then, and only then, will your claims be taken seriously.

Science does not progress by people saying "that model does not work". It progresses by people making a better model.

You cannot "disprove" or "prove" global warming by saying you don't like the current model, or disputing its conclusions, or even by saying you don't like the way the models, computations or testing were set up.

The only way to progress science is to provide a better model that fits existing data and makes better predictions than the current model.

If you have a better model, feel free to submit it to a peer-reviewed journal, who will be able to test it experimentally, confirm that it fits the current data, and will then be able to refine their predictions as to what happens to the atmosphere when we emit *-tons of CO2 into it, and that will become the new status-quo.

If you don't have a better model, but are just disputing the conclusions because you don't like them, then you're just contributing to noise rather than signal.