In either case, it's unnecessary to answer it.

"You can also argue that there is a correlation between solar energy and global warming, which is the explanation for all previous global warmings."

Hmmm.

Is that a question?

No it's your theory.

Are you sure you're not Bob Carter?

Is it? Perhaps it is, but it certainly doesn't say that solar energy changes are responsible for all global warming. The current warming is not included in that statement.

Exactly which post of mine did this quote come from?

I don't even know who that is.

That's very convenient. Maybe you should explain yourself better next time.

P.s. you can track down your own comments. I am not doing it for you. Sorry.

I will assume it's a misquote until I see evidence otherwise. I suspect that is not exactly what I wrote.

It is exactly what you wrote.

To look at this scientifically, what sources of heat are there on planet earth. I can think of three:

1. The Sun
2. Earth hot core
3. Chemical transformation

Any others?

Prove it.

I would imagine that collisions with asteroids could be fairly warm. And there's always those pesky aliens, coming down here and burning our coal.

It's not up to me to prove it. It's up to you to show me evidence that you didn't say it. Does that sound familiar?

Why don't you use your PhD research skills to find where you said it.


P.s. here's another! "And yet changes in solar irradiation have caused most, if not all, previous climate changes."

Indeed. So let's assume it is my theory. Do you disagree with it, or do you just enjoy quoting it?