Protip: Internet memes and nonsensical acronyms such as Protip and L2Science are banality at its finest and serve to display the relative maturity level of the debator. Leave them at the door if you wish to continue.

There is some evidence for human impact, but as I've stated previously, our contribution is about 0.3% to the greenhouse effect in regard to CO2. In other words, negligible.

Your C13 source states nothing. All it says is that we can measure human C13 from natural C13 due to its depletion. Beyond that, it says nothing. Completely irrelevant. Waste of time.

Stating that Oxygen levels 600 million years ago were 90% without a single source. Not considered and I couldnt find a single document backing up your claim, at best scientists have concluded that the levels were "like today".

I had not heard of the Vostok ice cores. But your quotation does not pertain to human impact, only to natural impact of greenhouse gasses. So, again, irrelevant to supporting your claim of anthropogenic warming. I already know that the greenhouse gasses cause global warming along with the sun.

1) No. 0.3% is meaningless.

2) No, it isn't. See above.

Did you have anything of value in regards to anthropogenic climate change or are you just content to cite sources that do not even pertain to that standpoint? 

The climate is very fragile. Saying .3% is meaningless is not necessarily true (though it may be true. I'm not quite up on climate science, only to know that tolerance ranges for animals and such are quite low, so small numbers can make big differences).

The climate isn't stable. It has never been stable, and it never will be stable. It will accomodate for 0.3% with relative ease. It already has:

"Despite sharp increases in carbon dioxide emissions by humans in recent decades that are warming the planet, Earth's vegetation and oceans continue to soak up about half of them, according to a surprising new study led by the University of Colorado Boulder.

The study, led by CU-Boulder postdoctoral researcher Ashley Ballantyne, looked at global CO2 emissions reports from the past 50 years and compared them with rising levels of CO2 in Earth's atmosphere during that time, primarily because of fossil fuel burning. The results showed that while CO2 emissions had quadrupled, natural carbon "sinks" that sequester the greenhouse gas doubled their uptake in the past 50 years, lessening the warming impacts on Earth's climate."

What is with the hate man?  Romney being a member of the Mormon church (yes, it is a church, not a cult) has nothing to do with what you are saying.  You seem to be pulling consipiracy theories out of nothing.  There is plenty of things you can condemn Romney on policy wise, you don't need to start making up conspiracy theories now.  

people here still believe the co2 hoax though there was climate gate ,though Al Gore has no idea about science,though Al Gore will earn millions with his co2 company thx to this lie,though the carbon lie is violating thermodynamik laws.

maybe my english is too bad but it is very easy to show that co2 is almost harmless.
The man made co2 is 1/10000(0.01%) of our complete atmosphere.if 1/10000 co2 in our atmosphere could heat up the planet 4-5degrees.Can you imagine what will happen with a cartridge filled with pressured 100% co2?
The cartridge would explode with such a power that even nitroglycerin would look like a harmless liquid compared to co2. In fact you can buy such cartridges whereever whenever because there is no such effect.
If 1/10000 co2 would have such an effect there wouldn't be expensive power plants or solar panels,just a black metal turbine cube with a double glass at the top where sun rays can pasd(glas filled with 100%co2).
The co2 inside the cube and the glas would heat up the water within seconds up to 500degrees.

We wouldn't spent so much money heating and isolating our houses if co2 had such an effect.We would simply add some co2 in our rooms.We didn't do that because co2 doesn't work.(research why greenland is called greenland though it is covered with ice-because this island was green some 100 years ago,without man made co2)

Do some research about former british politician Lord Mockton,he has proven in almost any way that co2warming is a lie and he is trying for years to debate with al gore about the climate change on tv but al gore doesn't want to because he knows he is a liar.
CO2 is like almost everything the greedy guys are trying to sell as as a good thing,globalisation(money),regime change in arabia(oil)_it is a lie and exactly the opposite of what was promised.

My statements on the intents and purposes of social conservatives ie. the brainwashed bible thumpers that make up the gop's biggest voting block are spot on.  Sheesh, they almost put in a Mormon Cult member just because the other fellow was black.  What further proof do you need?

I used those memes because I can't take this debate seriously. I don't think you grasp the level of education I've had on this subject. Then, for someone who has had none to try and argue what I've heard first hand from professors and read for myself is frankly laughable. 
Your following comment proves just what I mean:

"Our contribution is about 0.3% to the greenhouse effect in regard to CO2. In other words, negligible."

You know this to be a negliable amount how?  You don't. You have literally come to a completely arbitrary conclusion. You also clearly didn't read the paper. C13 means we can, and have, measured human impact on the atmospheric compostition. That was originally a point up for debate, but due to said evidence, it no longer is. We have changed the atmosphere. Fact. 
This is what I mean...You make references to a time when oxygen was incredibly low as if it has some relevance. Having to drag you through a high school and colledge education is not my job:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geological_history_of_oxygen
You hadn't heard of some of the most important ice cores in the global warming debate, and yet feel you are adequately equipped to discuss this topic?

Please, just stop talking. You literally do not know what you are talking about. Where exactly have you been educated on global warming? And why on earth do you think you are educated in the matter enough that you can just dismiss what peer reviewed acclaimed scientists discover?

Dude, I am mormon and I'm telling you that I find your repeated reference to my religion as a cult rather insulting.  Please stop, thank you.  

It's definitely not an awful comparison.  It's spot on.  Burning 6 Million Jews to death is probably a far more egregious crime than denying gays the right to get married.  But the hearts of America's Right is in the same place, and, luckily, they didn't put in their Mormon Cult Member President to show how destructive they can really be.

Want to know the truth about the Occupy Movement?
It meant that North America is FINE. There is nothing wrong at all.

Why is that an obvious conclusion?
(1) Humanity is a collective of people with a distribution of human traits. To ensure the survival of the human race, a select few individuals have genes which must rebel against the current establishment. Regardless of if it's the right thing to do.
(2) In cases where humanity has suffered in the past and in recent years, people have banded together, lead by the passionate arguments of these individuals.
(3) The Occupy movement failed to make a cohesive singular argument to inspire the rest of north american society. If there was a clear issue than they could easily rally support.


I'll be honest and say that I was turned off by the Occupy movement. In one of the cities they occupied a park near the residence of one of my close friends. They destroyed the park and accosted people in the streets, even to the point of pouring hot soup on one of the local residents. I have not heard how this movement will help repair the park or the damages they caused or even an acknowledgement of the negative side of their actions.

OK, so what?

I believe people need to educate themselves and gain a perspective on reality:

(a) Mauritania - a country that still has slavery
(b) There are over 1000 acid attacks in India each year. (That's someone pouring acid on someone else, usually a woman is the victim) Recently a woman, who has been horribly disfigured by an acid attack, has been forced to return to her husband who happened to be the one to pour acid on her face.
(c ) In Saudi Arabia, they recently put forward mandatory location tracking of all women's movements.


Finally,

If you really wanted to do something about it. Be productive members of society. George Lucas recently sold Star Wars for 4 billion dollars and is using his profits to start a non-profit that tackles education. Bill Gates founded and runs the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.