I've told you what science is already. Predictions of measurements that can be verified or recreating the effects of something. Your models don't fit what is going on at the moment or what happened in the past. I'll call them BS bars. Try filling in your tax returns with Error Bars and see how far that gets you. Only 0.3% of Climate science papers peer reviewed (11,944) said that CO2 drove most of the warming since 1950. That's not even man made CO2, that's all CO2. Why are you arguing with me on a forum? These are the numbers, no voodoo, no wishy washy excuses about aerosols that are unproven - these are the facts. Global temperatures are around 0.6c higher now that they were in 1860. These scientists are unwilling to say 0.3c (over half of the 0.6c rise) of that is driven by CO2. Bearing in mind that according to the EPA, man makes up 3% of global CO2 volumes. Let's take that 0.3c and reduce it to 3% to account for man made CO2. That leaves us, if your theory is right with a temperature rise due to man of just 0.009 of a degree. Let me know if you disagree with any of that and if so which parts.