Hi,
Post 1 - Blacknad's Original Post Finally a science thread that starts with science research.
Blacknad, I don't think you would find any scientist that would disagree with the thread's title. So there is nothing to argue about.
Carbon dioxide has increased in the atmosphere directly as a result of human activities. The evidence is pretty clear. The anecdotal evidence agrees with the scientific evidence. Even if ice core data can be completely discredited, there are plenty of other ways of establishing the rise in carbon dioxide levels, including direct measurements going back now for a great many years (even if only for small areas).
I have only one point of issue in your post and one disagreement in the detail presented. Though they were valid and I know where some of the research for it comes from, you actually do not back anything up. Once again it is an opinion piece you are quoting. So the four lines actually do not prove anything let alone "prove conclusively". The research on which the conclusions were based does support the theory but that is a different thing.
Next the disagreement. The research I have read indicates a change in carbon dioxide levels world wide since the Industrial Revolution (and that is not a precise thing either and therefore subject to interpretation or manipulation) from a date which I believe is 1850 but right now am not really well enough to go look up just to get the date right here) of 23% not the 30% quoted.
But no matter.
So what!
This is a bit like saying that polar bear numbers have vastly been reduced because the Inuit people migrated to the polar bears habitat range and started spearing them, shooting them with arrows and finally shooting them. Or that cities create their own climate to a certain degree that is hotter than if they were not there.
It is also very much like saying that pollution is due to man or any more specific statement like man's activities have caused a rise in the mercury levels of fish.
Standing alone the statements are true. But so what?
In the case of most of these statements all they say is man has had an effect on the environment.
In the case of Global Warming it means absolutely nothing. It is the next step that is the one that has any importance at all to Global Warming. That carbon dioxide build up in the atmosphere have caused or substantially contributed to global warming.
It is that step that links the known fact that carbon dioxide increase is due to human activity to man is causing global warming because carbon dioxide increase in the atmosphere is causing global warming.
That one is worth a thread and probably a debate for a few months. If you want to go there do not quote IPCC or the United Nations or NASA. Quote a study that attempts to make the link. It can be a physics study on the attributes of carbon dioxide. It could be a climate study on some aspect of climate that is related to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Summary: - Carbon dioxide increase is man made.
- Abundant proof exists.
- But the post was not proof in any form.
- So what?
- It does not prove Global Warming
- It does not prove that carbon dioxide is the cause of global warming
Regards
Richard
PS.
Is that format better? 
