Yes, humans don't really have control over nature, but we have done some cloud seeding. And that does cause rain to fall. But it certainly has nothing to do with the burning of fossil fuels.

Not a surprise, as Congress is a constitutionally established federal legislative branch of organized crime syndication today in the business of funding smaller organized crime syndicates and Omar simply represents the Somali division of their interests. 🤔😉 It all makes sense.

Water vapor (WV) increases in the atmosphere are likely due to more SW radiation absorption in oceans (decrease in stratocumulus clouds) and then warmer air holds more WV. Clouds form more often under higher galactic cosmic ray (GCR) fluxes can enhance ion-induced nucleation of new aerosol particles under certain conditions. WV is the strongest greenhouse gas in terms of total infrared absorption which is controlled by temperature which I believe so too is CO2 for the most part over decades. WV has been increasing by about 1% per decade, meaning overall temperatures are either increasing or that there have been less stratocumulus clouds, which has been confirmed by CERES data. I believe that higher solar activity cycles have a strong effect on the number of cloud formations on earth. But I also believe cloud seeding is an ongoing operation. We used this in Vietnam during the war. So, it's been around for some time and has likely been improved since the 1970. So, there is also some of that, but we don't know to what extent the government uses this, if at all.

I don't think that any genuine scientist would disagree with my statement.

"The collapse of West Antarctica could add several meters to sea level." Agreed that the ice sheet could be sensitive to ocean heat, that sensitivity has operated in past warm intervals, and the present episode began under a mix of natural variability and later anthropogenic influence might have a slight effect; however, the evidence does not support this assertion and natural variability appears to be the most likely cause.

While Antarctica is not uniformly “getting cooler,” and the main process driving its contribution to sea level rise is not surface air-temperature melting. I don't know the Russian word for Bull Shit but let's say it's bullshitolia. While I agree that the evidence is fairly uniform that Antarctica has been a net contributor to sea-level rise for thousands of years, it has been dominated by West Antarctica (especially the Amundsen Sea sector: Thwaites, Pine Island, and nearby glaciers). As far as I know the dominant mechanism in the Amundsen sector is ocean-driven basal melting of floating ice shelves by relatively warm Circumpolar Deep Water. This thins the shelves, reduces buttressing, and lets grounded ice flow faster into the ocean. It does not require warm surface air temperatures over the ice sheet. Surface mass balance (snowfall minus melt/runoff) can even be positive while dynamic discharge dominates the net loss. But as far as I can tell, it has nothing to do with your imaginary anthropogenic warming.

Not a Trump fan, but there does seem to be an effort to lie and destroy Trump.

I don't believe in assumptions. I believe in things that can be observed.

Nope. All facts you seem to post appear to be false.

I've recreated Hansen's work, explained his predictions and shown how his pole predictions were a complete failure.

Magical thermodynamics, obviously. 😄

Clearly this verified and peer reviewed science is over Jim's head. Perhaps we should slow down for him. 🤔😆

Surly you must know that proof does not come in the form of log and doctored graphs.

Not at all we are still in the same period, are we not? If you are having trouble following along, I have created a nice chart to help you with your deficiency. daisy-dream-tango-xenon.grok…

I've recreated all of this work, all the data and sources as well for the stomata records. Feel free to download and reproduce any graph. stomata-vs-ice-proxy-sb3.gro…

Would it? Correlation is not confirmation, and certainly not causation either.

Oh, I can keep up my friend. Trust me. I can keep up. In fact, I could do this while driving drunk.

Natural variability seems like a more logical answer than volcanic activity and ff usage doesn't it.

Eocene paleoclimate records suggest CO2 of 1000-1500 ppm resulted from sustained geological processes like outgassing, reduced carbon burial, and temperature-dependent ocean-atmosphere exchange rather than single eruptions. Interesting, and oddly similar to the common era.