I still don't have a clue what it is you are trying to say. If the temperature rise is corelated to the graph I posted, how does this challenge what I am saying? The fact temperature has risen would seem to strengthen my argument, which I don't believe you ever got the point of to begin with. I simply posted a graphic showing the process, and a typical measurement which is reflected all over the world in any number of places showing that CO2 in the atmosphere is constantly rising, as a way of stating "this is the process" and "this is the data, so conclude the results on your own", so I am mystified at what it is exactly you are trying to say. How you took that into some sort of specifity on the Mauna Loa island escapes me. But even more, are you denying that CO2 traps heat?
The implication behind what you posted was that rises in CO2 are proof that the globe is warming. You cited Mauna Loa observations, which show a very steady upward trend, as your proof. We can only infer the following from this:
1) You're asserting a correlation between temperature and CO2 concentration.
2) The correlation between CO2 and temperature is that CO2 traps heat.
3) The more CO2 there is in the air, the more heat will be trapped.
4) The more heat that gets trapped in the air, the warmer the air will be.
What I offered was an equally lengthy trend using a similar-enough sampling method, that shows no correlation whatever between CO2 concentrations and the temperatures in the exact same place on the planet. We can only infer the following from this:
1) That CO2 concentration may or may not have a measurable impact on air temperature outside of the laboratory.
2) That factors other than CO2 must, necessarily, be responsible for air temperature at any given point on earth.
If we're being silly, we can also infer this:
1) That CO2 only affects air temperature in places OTHER than where it's measured.
2) That "global warming" must only affect places other than those where CO2 concentration has risen but temperatures haven't.
We can also pursue some other questions that may inform our positions. Namely, "has anyone bothered to check whether or not CO2 retains enough heat in quantities less than 1% of the atmosphere to be measurable?"
If so, why the disparity between temperature and CO2 concentration on Mauna Loa? Is it the macadamia nuts?
If not, then why the fuck are we so worked up over CO2 levels?