&gt; No, it&#x27;s not based on superstitions. It&#x27;s based on climatology&#x27;s inability to deliver any explaination [...]<p>You have already established that you don&#x27;t believe humans are (or even could be) causing global warming. You are not seeking any scientific proof for that - it is merely a superstitious belief that you are holding. A personal bias, if you will.<p>The rest of your posts are merely rationalizations for this bias. The problem is not that the science is not explaining climate change enough. The problem is that no possible explanation will penetrate your mind&#x27;s defenses against the terrifying notion that <i>you might be wrong</i>.<p>Think of this: if thousands upon thousands of scientists, using hundreds of different methodologies and dozens of different datasets to arrive at the same conclusion, can&#x27;t convince you; if the fact that, since the industrial revolution, humanity released into the environment energy equivalent to 50% the Triasic-Jurassic extinction event can&#x27;t convince you; then nothing ever will.<p>At this point, there&#x27;s only one thing left: grab one of those datasets and run any sort of analysis you wish. See for yourself what kind of results you come up with. Unless you are willing to walk the walk, there is no point in continuing this discussion.