|
|
 Originally Posted by boost
The assumption your argument makes is that given our current abilities to observe and understand, we wouldn't have understood the causes of these past blips if they were contemporary. .
That is an astute assessment of the way I worded it. Allow me to clarify what I meant.
The data over the millennia appears analogous to the following: if a town has a rate of cancer at 20% and the town next to it drinks lead every night and has a rate of cancer at 5%, the current claim that the climate is warming due to human activity appears to be similar to a claim that the town with the 5% cancer rate is causing their cancer via their lead consumption.
Given the blip in temperature over the small quantities of years claimed, it appears that the blip could be a sampling error instead of an actual trend.
|
Reply With Quote