First off, volcanoes are a major cause of changes in climate, their dust shows up in the ice core samples from glaciers. They produce more co2 than man ever has.

Second, your still trying to ignore the correlation between Sun Spot activity and temperature change which is also recorded in the ice core samples.

The temper of the atmosphere is recorded by the isotopes formed in the snow and snow traps air bubbles as it stacks up, so the actual make up of the atmosphere at the time the snow was laid down is also known.

We are not buying the agenda.

Homestead, volcanoes are NOT a major cause of changes in the climate like the ones we are seeing. I must find the section in the course that deals with that falsehood. Volcanoes can cause a temporary shift -- TEMPORARY. They were one of the causes of "The Little Ice Age," a period of colder temperatures in Europe. But their effect only amounts to something about equal to the yearly burning of fossil fuels in Turkey, a rather minor effect, I would say.

Here is the material relating to the effects of volcanoes. As you can see, they are NOT a major cause of climate change/global warming:

But, despite all of the evidence, some people persist in claiming that the recent rise in
carbon dioxide is all natural— for example, they say that instead of it being caused by humans, it all came out of volcanoes.
Now, it is quite true that volcanoes emit some carbon dioxide and that—over very long periods of geological time—those small amounts can add up to make a really significant change to the atmosphere. However, over a couple of hundred years, the emissions aren’t large enough to make a difference.

There are two main classes of volcano: there are the ones that erupt under the ocean and the ones that erupt into the air. Both kinds are linked to the goings-on at the boundaries of the tectonic plates and to the upwelling of hot rock from the Earth’s mantle-- the layer below the crust. The undersea volcanoes are by far the more numerous, making up about 90% of the world’s volcanoes, although few of us have ever seen them. These volcanic chains are where new ocean crust is produced. But undersea volcanoes don’t produce very much carbon dioxide—only about 100 million tonnes per year—about the same amount as an average US state emits. Humans produce about 350 times as much carbon dioxide as the undersea volcanoes do. Carbon dioxide not only gets produced at the ocean ridges; it also gets consumed there. What happens is that the newly formed basaltic rock undergoes chemical changes when it contacts seawater. This reaction absorbs carbon dioxide from the water at a rate of about 150 million tonnes per year. The mid-ocean ridge volcanic processes as a whole, therefore, probably consume more carbon dioxide than they emit. We are much more familiar with the kind of volcanoes that erupt into the air. The biggest chain of these is the famous “Pacific Ring of Fire”. This is a belt running all the way around the ocean from New Zealand to Japan, then to Alaska and down to the Andes. Old oceanic crust is consumed at these places and they form volcanoes that produce much more carbon dioxide than the ones under the sea. The magma in these volcanoes comes not just from the Earth’s mantle, but also from the melting of the more carbon- and water-rich rocks in the crust. One reason these types of volcano tend to be more explosive is because of the larger amount of water vapour and carbon
dioxide in their magma. Mount Etna in Sicily is one of the most prolific carbon-dioxide producing volcanoes in the world. It produces about 13 million tonnes per year, but this amount is still only about half as much as what Sicily’s five million people emit from burning fossil fuels.
Dormant volcanoes and volcanic lakes together emit as much carbon dioxide as the actively erupting volcanoes do. Altogether, volcanoes that emit carbon dioxide into the air produce much more than undersea
volcanoes: about five times as much.

Volcanic rocks on the surface undergo weathering and this chemical process absorbs carbon dioxide out of the air—about 180 million tonnes per year—that’s approximately one-third of the amount put into the air by volcanoes. If we add up all the sources of volcanic carbon dioxide, we get 640 million tonnes per year. Once we subtract the carbon dioxide that the reactions with volcanic rocks consume, we are left with a net 310 million tonnes per year. This last amount is roughly equal to the human emissions from the country of Turkey, that’s less than one percent of all human emissions. Human emissions for the planet as a whole in 2012 were 60 to 120 times bigger than volcanic emissions. Carbon dioxide emissions from cement-making alone are 3 to 6 times bigger than those from volcanoes.

I forget which link has it, but, one of the videos below mentions that some islands have suffered a permanent rise in tide and mentions that the global warmest point to it as proof that the oceans are rising.

It also points out that the rise has only effected those islands and none of the mainlands. So how do you get global warming, that globally raises the sea level, but, only effects certain areas and nowhere else?

On the other hand, if the earth's crust adjusted itself downward somewhat in one area and not others, that would explain it.
___________________________________________________________

The great global warming swindle - Full version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELfQ7FI6Zoc

The Great Global Warming Swindle - Full Movie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-m09lKtYT4

GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX
Lenar Whitney
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BzItCPk5j4#t=254

Dr Don Easterbrook Exposes Climate Change Hoax
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LkMweOVOOI#t=40

How the Global Warming Scare Began
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyUDGfCNC-k#t=45

Antarctic ice shelf melt 'lowest EVER recorded, global warming is NOT eroding it'
http://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-40661-5.html#994184

Yes, there must be a conspiracy among thousands of scientists who are working in the field of climate science and global warming, on the atmosphere and the oceans, on carbon accumulation, on the chemical analysis of various markers left by global warming. These thousands of scientists must all be part of a giant conspiracy -- BladeRunner called it something like the greatest conspiracy known to mankind --

Not likely.

However, we do know that companies including Exxon-Mobil have been paying people to cause intellectual confusion over the idea that global warming/climate change are happening and that there are things we can do to slow it down and ameliorate it.

It is a replay of the American Tobacco Institute's way of dealing with the threat of legislation regulating tobacco and cigarettes when they paid people to cause confusion over the issue of smoking and cancer. And you folks have fallen for it. The worst part is not that you disagree, but that you refuse to examine the evidence that has accumulated, such as what is included in the course I started this thread by mentioning.

I am not Catholic and I don't believe in the hocus-pocus of churches, but the Pope will shortly take one action that will be a giant step in convincing the world to work hard at slowing down and ameliorating the present situation. Then all you denial insulters will be in even a much tinier minority than you already are in.

There is a fascinating course about the reasons people deny that global warming/climate change is happening or that these are man-made. I have been participating in discussions of these subjects in depth for months, as Blade Runner and a few others will tell you. What I have been trying to understand how folks many of whom are intelligent can deny the existence of these things or that they are man-made. Find this information at

http://www.edx.org/course/making-sense-climate-science-denial-uqx-denial101x

If you are open to learning the evidence that these things are real and in learning how and why some people (fortunately a minority) don't believe they are real or man-made, then tou would find the intellectual effort of taking this course (it is free) worthwhile. However, if you want to engage in motivation thinking and ignore facts, don't bother.

There is a fascinating course about the reasons people deny that global warming/climate change is happening or that these are man-made. I have been participating in discussions of these subjects in depth for months, as Blade Runner and a few others will tell you. What I have been trying to understand how folks many of whom are intelligent can deny the existence of these things or that they are man-made. Find this information at

http://www.edx.org/course/making-sense-climate-science-denial-uqx-denial101x

If you are open to learning the evidence that these things are real and in learning how and why some people (fortunately a minority) don't believe they are real or man-made, then tou would find the intellectual effort of taking this course (it is free) worthwhile. However, if you want to engage in motivation thinking and ignore facts, don't bother.