Let's dance...OK, denier scum. You regulars need to address the refutations of your BS in your very next posts. No repetitions of the BS without acknowledging them. Anything less is tantamount to an admission that the facts aren't on your side and you're engaged in willful ignorance.
Deniers routinely deny any of the science, even when doing so is self contradictory. You scumbags are no exceptions. Sometimes you claim non GHG causation. You might address the patterns of warming that only the greenhouse effect can explain - four different patterns.
The above mentioned patterns have compounding effects, resulting in a 10.7deg mid-winter increase at a Canadian Arctic weather station. Pretty effing hard to get that by subtle data manipulation. Explain how the sun (even if it's output were rising) would selectively warm most somewhere when the sun never rises.
Other times you claim it's not warming. Usually by invoking the laughable global conspiracy theory. See above. See Muller's Koch brothers sponsored meta study of temperature records that found MORE warming when the corrected data from problematic weather stations were omitted. See the short term, highly reliable temperature data that showed 1998 to be the warmest on record at the time, only to be eclipsed twice since then. See the precise, far less noisy, ocean temperature data that shows a massive recent increase down to hundreds of feet deep that represents 93.4% of the total global heat gain.
You know, just ANYTHING that's actually a fact based and rational argument.
Or just STFU and stop embarrassing yourselves. I'd suggest that you might admit your errors and accept the objective facts, but monkeys will fly out of your butt before you'll develop that level of intellectual integrity.
So is your position that the Earth is fine tuned to support life and if the climate average increases then life will not be able to adapt to that change?
Or do you hold the position that natural selection, random mutations and adaptation determine the evolution of life?