So where is the evidence that Carbon is a significant factor in global temperature trends?
Air pollution needs controlling, but what has that to do with carbon controls and costs?
So where is the justification for the political and financial controls?
Perhaps world government agenda is the real reason!
In a paper published in the Journal of Quaternary Science, Esper et al. (2014) write that tree-ring chronologies of maximum latewood density (MXD) “are most suitable to reconstruct annually resolved summer temperature variations of the late Holocene.” And working with what they call “the world’s two longest MXD-based climate reconstructions” – those of Melvin et al. (2013) and Esper et al. (2012) – they combined portions of each to produce a new-and-improved summer temperature history for northern Europe that stretches all the way “from 17 BC to the present.” And what did they thereby learn?
As the international team of researchers from the Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, Greece, Sweden and Switzerland describes it, this history depicts “a long-term cooling trend of -0.30°C per 1,000 years over the Common Era in northern Europe” (see figure below). Most important of all, however, they note that their temperature reconstruction…
View original post 211 more words
The GOLDEN RULE 
Thanks for opening my eyes to this fallacy. As pointed out, pollution whether it be of air or one of several things like radiation. Needs to be addressed over these concerns. Strangely, the oil producers and consumers seem to be the ones more actively calling for change? Reminds one of that mote in the eye?
If I remember correctly, the IPCC team “scientists” used tree ring proxies for some periods of time but abandoned either all of them or maybe just the portion that didn’t support the “hockey stick” uptick.
Again, IIRC, something similar with ice core proxies.
Whatever, the “science” is absolutely not settled, which of course is the way it should be with “true” science.