Natural CO2 emissions completely swamp manmade CO2 emissions in our atmosphere

Its something we've always know that the manmade CO2 emissions are completely dwarfed by the Natural CO2 emissions from the ecosystems.

But for the lurkers that dont know here is a refresher.

Total amount of CO2 in our atmosphere is 0.039%, that percentage right so total amount is 0.00039 out of 100.

From this total amount 97% comes from the ecosystems (sea, land and animals/plants) thats 97%.

From this total amount 3% is manmade CO2 from fossil fuel emissions.

The IPCC through their parametric computer generated projections are telling us that the 3% will destroy the Earth unless we are all committed to financial slavery through the carbon tax to reduce our CO2 emissions.

Depending on what phase our sun is in and our position on our eliptical orbit around the sun and whether we are having a el nino or a la nina.

The ecosystems have the potential to throw up even more CO2 in our atmopshere which can eclipse any manmade CO2 emissions.

Any punter seeing this evidence will know straight away that AGW is a lie and the carbon tax is a scam.

Proffessor Murry Salby is Chair of Climate Science at Macquarie University and he has been researching CO2 in our atmosphere.

He has come to the conclusions that,

 

Once again for the lurkers.

97% of 0.00039 = 0.0003783 CO2 emissions from ecosystems (sea, land, plants animals)

3% of 0.00039 = 0.0000117 CO2 emissions from manmade fossil suel emissions

 

I think people are getting sick of posts from the Flat Earth Society dumb, at least check out your reference. He is wrong.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Murry-Salby-Confused-About-The-Carbon-Cycle.html
and just for your interest, seeing how you feel we need explanations, that is 30 billion tonns. Now CO2 is a gas so if we compressed it to a liquid we would still have 30 billion tonns of the stuff. Even you cannot honestly say that is a good thing.

 

Ok Dom we have Proffessor Murry Salby of the Department of Environment and Geography at Macquarie Universiry in Sydney.

Professor Murry Salby is Chair of Climate Science at Macquarie University. He’s been a visiting professorships at Paris, Stockholm, Jerusalem, and Kyoto, and he’s spent time at the Bureau of Meterology in Australia.

And we have your debunking mate Rob Painting.

Lurkers make up your own mind.

And Dom how can anyone get sick of the TRUTH??????!!!!!!

I would call it an education more than anything else, most people dont even know half this stuff.



.

 

Is it just me or are these guys getting more desperate?

 

More deperate for what?

The truth is the truth, facts are facts.

No amount of computer projections can change that.

I can do alot of fancy things on computers too.

 

Desperate to convince. You are repeating yourself ad nauseam.

 

I dont think i have posted a thread about proffessor Murry Salby's work before.

I dont think i have posted a thread about Dr.Nils-Axel Morner's work before

http://www.politicalforum.com/australia/257497-rise-sea-levels-greatest-lie-ever-told.html

So then how am i repeating myself?

 

The theme and tone of your threads. Your unshakeable belief that you know everything and are 100% right. Your words and phrases that you repeat incessantly.

 

Dumb,
you sound like a broken record, on and on and on the same. Tell your grandchildren, that everything is fine, if you are into story telling, but please face the facts that we got plenty of man made problems.
Cheers bud

 

Say I make $1000 a week, and spend $970 a week. That's only a 3% difference. Yet at the end of the year, my bank account will have increased by $1560. And if I keep that up year after year, my bank account keeps growing higher and higher.

According to dumbanddumber, it's not possible for my bank account to grow like that, given that it was only a tiny 3% difference. His train of logic is laughable nonsense, being that it contradicts common sense and observable reality. These denialists are literally not smart enough to understand how an equilibrium system works, a concept that even a bright 10-year-old can grasp. That's how pathetic denialist science is.

But then, we all know denialism isn't science. It's a right-wing crank fringe political cult, which uses the denialist junk science as an excuse to scream hatred at the opposition.

 

Can`t agree there. Your description better fits the disciples of the big, expensive, new religion.

 

Ground control to Major Tom !?!?

 

Typical reply of someone who cannot refute the post.

 

While i appreciate the simplicity of your model, CO2 in our atmosphere just doesn't work like that.

 

Are you referring to the extremists? Most people on this board aren't extreme alarmists, just normal rational people. It is curious that people like you use opposing extremism to justify your own extremism.

 

It was the exact same logical fallacy that you and two other posters who agreed with you used.

 

At least some people use logic and are able to differenciate.......

 

I`m not after anyone`s money.

 

Never said you were.

 

The nazis couldn't be told i would call them extreme.

As a matter of fact anyone who can't be told is extreme imo.

A logical person looks at the arguement from both sides.

Examines what he finds and then comes to some sort of conclusion.

And as the good doctor said is open to "reinterpretation".

And might i add abit more examination - always.

 

That's hilarious considering you admitted in another thread that you knew 100% that you are right on the matter, which implies you are not open to "reinterpretation" at all

 

If you or anyone else can prove to me that AGW is real and not just the natural cycle of the Earth fluctuating up and down.

I will admit i'm wrong.

I want the TRUTH!

 

Haven't seen that at all on the liberal, tree hugging, granola munchin', Subaru drivin', hairy armpittin', Obama votin' side of the aisle.

 

Back in the real world, we measure the _direct_ evidence for AGW theory. We see the heat flux balance out of whack, the outward IR flux to space closing down in the greenhouse gas spectral bands, and the longwave radiation back to earth increasing. There is no explanation for those observations other than AGW theory. AGW theory successfully predicted that and many other non-obvious things way ahead of time. Because AGW scientists have been proven correct again and again, they've earned credibility.

Denialists, OTOH, want that same credibility even though they actively refuse to do science, and even though they get it all wrong over and over. Denialists, if you have a competing theory that explains the observed warming and the observed physical data, then present it. Do some science for a change. Create a theory, make predictions based on that theory, and see those predictions proven right.

Now, I won't be holding my breath, given the hyperemotional and craven nature of denialists. Almost all of them (see Southern Man's post as a prime example) thing that screaming about how much they hate the dirty hippies (who stole their girl, took their lunch money and made them look stupid) is a substitute for science. As I keep pointing out, denialism is a right-wing kook fringe political cult, not science.