It has to be CO2, what else could it be????

I stated several years ago, the blind faith that "it has to be CO2, what else could it be", would waste, and slow the time identification of other sources. In this case, worse GHG's.

http://www.laboratoryequipment.com/news/2013/12/chemists-discover-long-lived-greenhouse-gas

Models, based on wrong assumptions are worse than nothing. Especially, when science is replaced with an agenda (like dial back technology, way back....).

"Consensus science" is a joke, that just isn't funny.

 

Dr. Judith Curry has had some interesting things to say about the focus on CO2.

Her main argument is that so much funding and money has been spent on CO2 and so little on other factors that effect the climate the climate science research has been put back decades and now in the face of a flat and even slightly cooling world climate scientists have no answers because they know so little about other factors.

 

Warmers remind me of the late Gilda Radner's character - Rosanne Rosannadanna - who often said "It's always something."

And I'm shoveling the global warming off my driveway.

 

Climate science is still at the crawling stage, yet to take its first baby steps.

https://www.google.es/search?q=clim...n+its+infancy"&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

 

It is likely a combination of many inputs is responsible for atmospheric changes that are heating the planet, a focus on CO2 has been taken partially because it is one of the larger inputs, but also due to media representation as the primary source. Most climate scientists understand that CO2 is not the reason for climate change, but one of many.

 

Meanwhile, simple fixes, with equal benefit are ignored.

It supports the my position that CO2 is focus, because controlling energy has tremendous political benefit.

Don't let a crisis go to waste......

 

I like my The IPCC is 100 monkeys pounding on typewriters hoping something worth while will develop analogy. Seems to me all that they have managed to do though is fling their poop at anyone who disagrees with them

As far as I know no one has been able to explain any of the major climate shifts of the last 10 - 15K years although I do like the glacier theory for the onset of the Younger Dryas. Still no one has been able to explain the sudden 10C temp rise in a decade at the end http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/abrupt/data4.html

another periods of interest occurred at around 14.5 ky BP was also very rapid, leading to the Bölling-Alleröd warm period in less than twenty years

read some thing besides the cereal box science of the blogs from the pro agw shills and you can find all sorts of intriguing periods of abrupot temperature changes which have never been explained

 

Agreed, but I'm afraid that isn't the case.

 

Water vapor good. Man made CO2, methane (from cows and landfill), nitrous oxide (from fertilizer) and CFC (banned years ago) bad.

Energy associated with the wealth from productivity, and fuel, fertilizer, and livestock associated with the food production that has supported population growth, are killing the planet.

Isn't the real agenda is to save the earth, by reducing man to a hunter gather (global population, maybe 1 million).

 

Not one million, the stated agenda is 500 million.

 

Much better, we only starve 5.5 billion to death, instead of 5.999 billion.

 

Actually, it's over 6.5 Billion. Current world population is over seven now.

 

Why do environmentalists loath our species so much ? All they have done for humanity for the last 30 years is obstruct and impede it at every turn with any genuine environmental concerns that might actually need addressing being relegated to a distant second behind a wall of anti corporate anti globalisation cynicism

 

I'm not sure that man can do much to "save the earth" that he's unable to destroy.

Nobody puts it better than this guy:

[video=youtube;7W33HRc1A6c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c[/video]

 

I suggest environmentalism, operated correctly, is a good thing (I lived in Los Angeles in the late 60's - cough). However, that, and other good things, have been infiltrated by bitter people, looking for a cause to push their agenda.

Good enough, didn't fit that agenda, so good is enough isn't any more.

 

Its victim mentality. Every single leftists wants to be a victim. Global warming allows every single person on earth to be a victim despite how good their circumstances.

 

CO2 certainly is involved in keeping planet Earth warm enough for animals to survive on the surface, but it isn't alone, there are others.

We humans should be overjoyed that we're doing our bit to warm planet Earth, because we're the weakest of all the animal here, unable to survive without protective clothing or shelter for any length of time.

 

Read it, and remember:

CO2 is the leading forcing factor, for climate CHANGE, since it is the most prevalent greenhouse gas, by far.

Any time CO2 goes up, fast, warming and a mass extinction result.

EVERY TIME this happened, CO2 rose only a fraction as fast, as it is going up, today.

CO2 leads natural melting of ice and evaporation, of water, and it leads melting, of frozen methane, the number 2 and 3 GHGs.

Volcanoes then erupt, from relief of glacial ice, which melts, over magma chambers, and from heavier tides, over sunken magma.

Eruptions are on the upswing, in frequency and severity, similar to large storm events.

GHGs don't break down, after a volcanic winter.

The Earth heats up, eventually, with acidic water and too many eruptions.

Jellyfish become the major predator, with poisonous algae blooms, in warmer currents, while acid is carried, by colder currents, formerly a source of O2, to life.

Humans not only emit CO2, but humans defoliate, thwarting CO2 respiration.

Humans and domestic animals also emit CH4.

Humans emit tons of industrial GHGs, including many, which do not degrade; so what, about CFCs being banned? Tons of new GHGs come out of human industry, neglected.

Deniers won't be getting as much money, since the Kochs, Exxon, and other corporations are now refraining, from donations.

We won't number, in the billions, forever, if we keep waiting for deniers to drop off the edge, of the Earth.

 

if you reread what you wrote you'll see you omitted a word and deniers not being the most astute will read into into what they want it to mean-CO2 is not the reason for climate change-

it should read "Most climate scientists understand that CO2 is not the *ONLY* reason for climate change, but one of many." ..which is correct but it is the most important GHG in regards to climate change at this time, as temps increase another more potent GHG will become unlocked from the frozen tundras and cold ocean depths NH4

 

Three, two, one ...

 

Boy oh boy, funny, I was told as a boy at school, I would see our country getting warmer, as we were coming out of a small ice age!
Some one once said the world was flat, global warming and being flat are for those less well educated.

Highlander

 

Whether or not CO2 is causing climate change, fossil fuel pollution only causes harm and should be reduced. Most sane people would agree with this.

 

Most sane people look at all the facts, then come to there own conclusions, well it's better than someone sticking there finger up ones nose and leading them up the garden path!
To many times have the "facts" been shown to be incompetent and engineered for another agenda.
Regards
Highlander

 

Most insane people would also agree, but they, unlike those of us who consider ourselves probably not insane, would have a solution.
Their solution would be ginormous metal windmills, dotted around the countryside, spoiling whatever natural beauty preceded them.
No, not those wide open wasted spaces the USA is littered with, that a nuclear holocaust couldn't damage.

 

I see. You introduce, in sentence 1, what most insane people would agree upon, but then you deflect, to how you consider yourself "not insane," to then introduce your solution, which is not, to name "their solution," or "ginormous metal windmills."

You seem to be dabbling, in the circular logic area, reserved for people, who are variously diagnosed, but you've left the area of meds, to be resolved.

Have one of your own damn pretzels, eh?

Your aggressive hypocrisy offers clues, which a professional should analyze, if one is not already so employed.