At least you're making a modest claim. Calling yourself an amateur whatever-you-like isn't saying much at all.
I have no problem with Milankovitch cycles, but there is no evidence that they explain the global warming of the last 50 years. Try actually reading the link - maybe you'll learn something.
The only thing that explains the observed warming of the last few decades is greenhouse gas forcing.
At least you're making a modest claim. Calling yourself an amateur whatever-you-like isn't saying much at all.
I have no problem with Milankovitch cycles, but there is no evidence that they explain the global warming of the last 50 years. Try *actually reading* the link - maybe you'll learn something.
[The only thing that explains the observed warming of the last few decades is greenhouse gas forcing. ](https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-natural-cycle.htm)
And what credentials do you have making you a expert, move one child.
And what credentials do you have making you a expert, move one child.
It's an anonymous internet forum - any credentials I claim are meaningless. However, you can see that my arguments obviously make more sense than yours regarding global warming, and agree with those who do have the credentials.
It's an anonymous internet forum - any credentials I claim are meaningless. However, you can see that my arguments obviously make more sense than yours regarding global warming, and agree with [those who do have the credentials](https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/).
As an Amateur Geologist I rely on what's real and not theory, global warming is just a theory while Milankovitch cycles is fact. walk down the grand canyon and one can see "global warming" as some call it happen 41,000 years ago and a few other times so you except anything you want, even the tooth fairy.