Originally posted by chuckChuck
View Post
All I am asking is how much worse is it thanks to CAGW vs. without? Do you think 100% of SLR is the result of human activities, because that is always the impression the alarmist try to give? Do you "believe" that without elevated CO2, SLR would be zero, and coastal communities would never have to worry about SLR displacing them? How many different ways can I word this simple question?
Instead of answering, all you and DML keep doing is proving my point that you can't possibly question this one because it is all you have left.
Comment