lets start off with the 'claims that "hockey stick" reconstruction'. what exactly is "hockey stick". if your talking aobut it being refuted, who refuted it? IPCC? they are the ones that tried to claim that the evidence from tree rings in washington state disproved it. first off, the tree rings dont show temperature, and secondly, washington state has the ocean currents to moderate the temperature swings. Show me where they got their "independant verification"
so far you have not shown any place that was not quoting IPCC that has stated that man is the primary cause of the temperature rise. If mount pinatub was not the base line, why do most studies used 1992 and 1993 as their base lines.
as far as green land is concerned please explain why they discount the amount of ice increases in the interior and focus on how much the fringes are melting. As far as i can see, there is more ice being added to in the interior than there is ice loss in the fringes. If you have 10 acre with a one meter increase, and 1 acre with a 10 meter loss, have you gained or loss ice? Global warming alarmist would say that there was a 10 acre/meter loss.
as far as the co2 goes, maybe you should check out what information about global ice ball. these are periods where the entire earth, including the middle of the pacific, froze solid. What happens is that the ice reaches a point where the albeto of the planet is such that there is insuffient energy from the sun reaching the earth to maintain the temperature, so there is a continual freeze. It continuses to freeze until there is no unfrozen water left touching the atmosphere. With no water to evaporate, there is no more clouds. With no clouds the sun hits the ice and bounces away. So what happens to cause the ice ball called earth to melt? volcanos, especially super volcanos. they spew out tons of gasses, including sulpher dioxide, water vapor and carbon dioxide. Now the sulpher dioxide will combine with part of the water vapor and form high level clouds that will block out the sun. Now with the ice already covering the world, this does not make a lot of difference. Eventually, over several years, the sulpher falls out of the atmosphere, as does a the water vapor. fortuantely, this leaves the co2 in the atmoshere, or at least a good chunck of it. Over several hundred thousand year (perhaps even a million or two) years, this co2 builds up and as it does the greenhouse effects begins to build. eventually there is enough co2 in the air to cause the ground levels to increase above freezeing. when this happens, the ocean (or a small part of it) melts. As soon as the water vapor hits the atmosphere in large quantities, the fun begins. for a thousand years, there is such a storm that it makes katrina look like a summer squal. eventually, the rain washes out most of the co2 and the temperature drops again. but by this time the ice has retreated to beyound the runaway point, and the sun is able to keep warming the earth up. the proof of this is large calcuim carbon deposits in very high altitudes. the only way they could have been formed is if that areas was underwater. the only way that could happen is if there were an ice surrounded lake there and a large amount of water that had an extreamly high level of carbon in it. the fact that there are places like this all over the world shows that it happen all over the world.
the point is that rain can wash out the co2 by itself. the higher the level of co2, the higher the amount of co2 that gets washed out. If other means handle the majority now, that does not mean more of it will be washed out with the levels increase.
