drummindiver

One Man's Bible. Sequel to Soul Mountain.

The only economic impact is on tax grabs which raises prices. Ok. Do as I say, not as I do. Again, and everyone knows this by now, correlation does not equate causation.That is the fact of that. CO2 is real. There is no economic fallout from them except for tax grabs. It is. look on any forum, magazine or newspaper. Do I have hard data? I'll look. As for your oft repeated " fact" that CO2 is the catalyst, -1 has stared that the levels have been " somewhat" stable during the Holocene. How then is there a warm period in the Hans Tuegen Ice Cap dated 4000 years ago? Explain the cooling period from 1940 to 1980? http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/igsoc/agl/2002/00000035/00000001/art00005

It's also important to note that Dr Moore indeed has been at the forefront of the environmental movement here in Canada for decades. More important than Suzuki, though not the media whore Suzuki is. Media needs headlines, and climate change sells. You won't find any positive stories about climate on msm for this very reason.

I think you are lookin at this backwards. Do we teach about the Holocaust? Why not censor associated literature and it's antisemitism? Civil war? WW I & II ? Take To Kill a Mockingbird. Black man erroneously accused of rape and the racism that engulfs the small town. Harper Lee does an excellent job showing the moral pitfalls of racism. This book would be a huge loss to schools and libraries due to censoring a word which higblight the exact thing it is fighting against.

So now affirmative action is a myth? mmmmkay.

"What's so civil about war anyway?"

"War: diplomacy by extremis". Forget who said it.

...butHarper. Usual schmegmah. Can't just answer the question.

Those flying spaghetti monsters. They must have sucked it out also. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v398/n6723/abs/398121a0.html

Your obsevasion is totally incorrect You may add up the CO2 but as I pointed out previously you cannot exclude other CO2 sources which many claim supercede anthropogenic.

Natural sources of CO2 and methane are entirely mis-stated or unknown. Human activity is entirely eclipsed by natural sources. Helium is obtained from gas wells in deep canyons. The miniscule amount of Helium must be separated from copious amounts of CO2 which just percolates up thru the Earth. For any oil that has oozed out of the earth, microbes metabolize it (burn it). A booming industry for cleaning up oil spills are bio-engineered microbes to accelerate decomposition. Anaerobic microbial action generates methane in mines (coal mine gas). Any volatile hydrocarbons (methane, ethane, propane), which have vented from the earth for millennia, are oxidized (burned) by free radicals, formed from photodissociation of several oxygen-rich molecules in the atmosphere. Water photodissociates to H+ and the hydroxyl radical (-OH), at the elevations where solar radiation is more intense. In essence, whether we burn , the microbes metabolize it, CO2 at 400 ppm measures 0.04 of one (1) percent. Methane is measured in the parts per billion and has a half life in the atmosphere of 7 to 9 years. TOregon State Univ. estimates that there are 1 million seamount volcanoes. The oceans cover 75 % of the planet and the crust is thinner there than on land. Ergo, far greater gases vented across the oceans, including the powerful acid gases contributing to the oceanic pH decline from 8.4 to 8.3 The very active Gakkel Ridge spans the Arctic Ocean and directly beneath the North Pole are a cluster of "CO2 Explosive Volcanoes" (Sam Carana). Due to the interior uptick in heat, natural CO2, and atmospheric moisture, the sub-Arctic regions of Canada and Siberia is "greening" and the tree line is moving north. There is more habitable / arable land, which points to the OP of this thread. www.nuclearplanet.com

Sorry. Leafs/Montreal 4 to 3. I'm doing the best Ican lol.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2004.00812.x/full

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/11/08/nasa-has-known-since-1971-that-co2-is-not-dangerous-yet-lied-to-the-public-continuously/

I've seen contradictory evidence. Are you worried about the current CO2 levels? They are low if anything. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/05/09/plants-encouraged-as-co2-levels-reach-400-ppm/

There is no proof that it does. Sorry, I'm missing your point here.

Please be more exact.

Right, but you can't bring it up in the OP then claim it irrelevant.

The core ideas are actually being questioned more. Cook's 97% report is in disrepute and AGW is being shown to be a sham. Clean up the damn planet but let's not make silly.

, "The fact that we had both higher temperatures and an ice age at a time when CO2 emissions were 10 times higher than they are today fundamentally contradicts the certainty that human-caused CO2 emissions are the main cause of global warming. When modern life evolved over 500 million years ago, CO2 was more than 10 times higher than today, yet life flourished at this time,” he added. “Then an Ice Age occurred 450 million years ago when CO2 was 10 times higher than today... Humans just aren’t capable of predicting global temperature ." http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.0028-646X.2001.00335.x/full

Not the fact of it. Just states CO2 was elevated at both times. The tests in the link I provided also used biomass. Lots of things cause weather changes. Please note CO2 is at a higher level during ice ages.

Actually your numbers are high. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00382-013-1770-4

Hardly attributal to humans considering the time period. edit-read what he wrote. That information is also in link provided.