I did not argue that humans have no impact on atmosphere. I did not even argue that humans cannot have an affect on climate. What I did do was lay out a plethora of reasons why it is difficult to assign a solid relationship between minuscule fluctuations in CO2 levels in the atmosphere to just human activity. The data clearly shows in fact that over the last 2.7 my of strong evidence, CO2 increases have tended to lag global climate fluctuations by about 610 years. The fact that the world-wide mean temperature has supposedly warmed by 1/2 degree centigrade in the last 110 years. Even if true, the level is insignificant in terms of geophysical time frames that we know looking back over the same time frame of 2,7 my. MANN's data points are seriously flawed and overstated because of the general location of data collection stations are located mostly on land based locations that 110 years earlier were generally rural whereas they are no located in heat island cities. I can refute an overwhelming majority of Mann's ridiculous claims and assumptions and show how badly flawed his data is. The 99% you cite are only about 23% scientists almost all attached to governments and 71% social or political signers who represent governments, government funded and vested political institutions.

Bottom line, don't challenge someone that has studied both side of the issue in depth over twenty years. I ate your lunch in the previous post and you have no comeback that any of the scientists that I agree with would believe. The ones I agree with are not paid by government grants or green energy grants or Al Gore's climate exchange where only idiots would allow a commodity like AIR to be bought and sold. I'm not that stupid. Liberals ARE!