I am very confident the information is accurate for the sites which I posted. Know why? Because
unlike you, using your politicized pseudoscience website to paste a bunch of references,
I checked the references that were being cited on Wiki's Global Warming page for any fact that I choose to use. Specifically, regarding the Wiki's global warming page,
you can not refute a single solitary piece of information there.
In fact, I even decided to check some of yours,
since you didn't, and as I previously stated, the reference I looked into is incongruous with your thesis.
Well, my opinion is that your talking points are for amusement only. You are certainly entitled to your amusing opinions, but I am sorry, you are not entitled to your own facts. Stop politicizing science.
Please read this:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/full/438900a.html
Please.
I don't expect you to read it. In fact, I would bet on it. But I suppose that some others may be interested so I posted it anyway. We are having a non-technical discussion on global warming (although you take the non-technical part to an extreme) so for these purposes, this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming is sufficient.
This specific webpage is not unreliable. This is a non-academic discussion on a topic which none of us has any meaningful expertise on; said webpage is fine for neophytes of this discipline.
Does my university allow me to use it in papers? Do you read? Sorry, that is condescending, surely you read...but
do you comprehend? All available evidence suggests that you certainly do not. Please reread my previous posts in this thread to learn where I gather information for papers.
To deny global warming as an occurrence is not even laughable...it's beyond parody.