Why is a graph that clearly shows that global warming is not caused by CO2, being posted?

There is absolutely no doubt that adding CO2 to the atmosphere results in warming at the surface. It's a matter of laboratory measurement of the spectrum of CO2, some straightforward thermodynamics, and calculation. It's no more complex than the proposition that if you put an extra blanket on your bed, you'll be warmer.

Just read the legend of the graph. They tell you why they compute the slopes from 1982-2005. If that isn't enough for you, the NAS report from 2000 on temperature reconciliations explains in thorough detail why this is done with the satellite data. The National Academy of Science report on global temperature measurements published in 2006 put to bed all objections to the idea that the planet is warming. One of the more outspoken critics of Hansen, Christy, was a co-author of that report and agrees with its executive summary. For chrissakes, even Lindzen admits the planet is warming. Continually raising these silly objections is dumb. Read the reports from the NAS and move on. Both are available free of charge online.

its called miss information propaganda ask why we got mosquito's that is easier to answer

This is "clear"? You gotta be kidding. Look at the raw data and the lines. What this graph shows is that the data is not good enough to say anything one way or another. Either the UAH or the RSS could be correct. Because of the massive amount of other proof that CO2 is causing global warming, I'd say the RSS data is probably right. There's no real problem here. There is a concept in science called "the weight of the evidence". The weight of the evidence is that CO2 is causing global warming. My personal favorite piece of the evidence is this. If you model global warming, you CANNOT reproduce recent temperatures without making the main cause anthropogenic greenhouse gases. Include them and you can. Go to the library and read this paper: Meehl, G.A., W.M. Washington, C.A. Ammann, J.M. Arblaster, T.M.L. Wigleym and C. Tebaldi (2004). "Combinations of Natural and Anthropogenic Forcings in Twentieth-Century Climate". Journal of Climate 17: 3721-3727 There are many other arguments, as others have listed here. And NOTHING on the other side that works numerically. Scientists believe in numbers, not "logic". Many scientific theories seem illogical, but are accepted because of the data. Quantum mechanics, relativity, etc. I love the guys saying (falsely) that scientist believed in a flat Earth. Scientists haven't believed in a flat Earth for over 2000 years, since Eratosthenes provided data on its' diameter. Only ignorant "skeptics" who ignored the data believed that. "There's a better scientific consensus on this [climate change] than on any issue I know... Global warming is almost a no-brainer at this point. You really can't find intelligent, QUANTITATIVE arguments to make it go away." Dr. Jerry Mahlman, NOAA Good websites for more info: http://profend.com/global-warming/ http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462 http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/ http://www.realclimate.org "climate science from climate scientists"

this is comparing the exact same thing by three different methods edit nm, i see your point i wouldn't say this clearly shows global warming is not caused by CO2 it really doesn't show anything except that two studies using the same data showed the earth is warming. One points strongly to CO2 and one points less strongly to CO2. One was conducted by a known skeptic who is closely associated w/ right wing think tanks and the other wasn't The 1982 start is a little suspicious, but I would need more detail on the reasoning for it than this link provides. It looks like this was due to a "NASA issue" regarding the satellite.

i don't know what to say.

cosmo, there's plenty of doubt that adding CO2 to the atmosphere warms the surface. All there is to link the two is "connection". It's possible that a warming of the surface adds CO2 to the atmosphere. There's a lot science doesn't know yet, and the GW alarmists claiming that there is no doubt of something reveals them to not be scientists at all. Just over 600 years ago, there was no doubt that the Earth was flat. That was the consensus, and no "credible" scientist challeged it. It wasn't really a scientific certainty, more of a political certainty. That wasn't that long ago. I have books in my library that were originally written before then, and there are still plenty of man-made structures from even farther back. It may be a political certainty that man is causing the CO2 rise which is causing global warming, but it's far from a scientific certainty.

they do that to confuse us normal folks what is a graph??? does that play music???