Who is right? The climate alarmists? Or the Climate deniers?

Who said anything about biology? That's physics.

 

Whatever you want to call it CO2 is not a panacea. Plants need many things beside CO2. Like water.....like nitrogen.....

 

There is no panacea, but rising atmospheric CO2 correlates to increased crop yields.

 

You did.

You said:
"CO2 is not a pollutant in any sense of the word despite the yawning chasm of idiocy known as progressive politics. Rather it is vital to life- virtually all life on this planet."

 

And, drought correlates to decreased crop yields.

Let's not pretend that providing more of one requirement overcomes a deficit of another requirement.

 

Drought is not correlated with rising CO2; increased crop yields are.

 

Sorry, that's just dumb. What form of life on this planet doesn't either breath in oxygen and give off CO2 or do the opposite?

Hmmm?

 

Once again, you are ignoring that life forms require a variety of inputs.

Giving more of one does not cover for the absence of others.

That is basic biology.

Applying more CO2 does not cover for lack of water, for example.

 

That isn't even close to anything I said. Are you purposely trying to embarass yourself?

 

According to pretty much all experts, increased co2 emissions are a significant cause of climate change.

CO2 is certainly needed by plants.

But, the climate change caused by the additional CO2 is causing droughts and other phenomena that are bad news for agriculture in various regions.

CO2 does not make up for droughts.

 

Oh, I get it now. You're hooked on the "all experts" crap.

CO2 causes every disaster imaginable from droughts and bad weather to seriously bad hair days. OK, got it.

My point is what are you going to do about it? Shut down the world's economies which ALL run of fossil fuels or nuclear? How do you think that's going to work out? You really don't need to be a self described expert to figure that out.

So, what do you propose we do about it? A problem without a solution really isn't much of a problem.

 

And now read very closely exactly what you just said. And think about it.

The shortages of water have not a damned thing to do with rainfall. In fact, there really is no "drought". Never has been.

What most of the Western States (especially California) have is grossly more people that the local ecology can support. Truth is, over a 10 year average cycle California still gets as much rain as it did 2 centuries ago.

And I have seen this first-hand. At the time I was born, California was still a huge agricultural center of the country. And the state had a population of around 18 million.

Today, the state has a population of just under 40 million. That is over twice the population, but no more or less water than there was less than 60 years ago.

You know, this is not exactly rocket science here. To give water to those people, it has to come from somewhere. That is why the state is being pumped dry. Not because of drought, that is all bullshit, to scare people into doing what they say. The real issue is not drought, it is overpopulation.

And it can really be shown in the population of LA. When I was born, less than 2.5 million. Today, it is just under 12.5 million.

This is the problem, you can not see the forest through the trees. Even if 10% more rain fell on California than did 60 years ago, it would not be enough because the population there has exploded. And now the rest of the ecosystem is suffering because the water tables are being pumped dry to provide those in the cities with water.

The shortage is completely artificial and man made. And has not a damned thing to do with "climate change" or "drought", it is simply over population.

 

You claimed the CO2 was actually GOOD.

I showed you that's false.

Now you want to ignore the scientists involved in climatology related fields!!!

Then, you jump to what we should do about it - a classic switch of argument.

 

Well, scientists do not agree with your diagnosis here.

It clearly would be better for water supply if there were fewer people.

But, there absolutely IS a drought, a significant decrease in water supply, going on.

 

Once again, what you really should be saying is "Well, scientists I believe in do not agree with your diagnosis here".

As I keep saying, you are a fanatic, and refuse to see anything that does not agree with your beliefs. This is why you never give real references and repeat yourself over and over again as nauseum. Like somebody repeating Leviticus 19:26. You seem to believe that if you repeat yourself enough times, it will prove you are right and everybody else is wrong.

That is not science, that is fanaticism.

 

No, the vast majority of all scientists in fields related to climatology agree that Earth is warming and that human activity is the major cause.

I've cited NASA and NOAA many times. I have not stated anything of a personal nature on this, as no poster here can legitimately claim to be more knowledgeable on this subject than are the scientists who study this topic.

That doesn't suggest I'm a fanatic.

If you want cites, look at any of these:
Organizations of scientists who agree human activity is the major cause of climate change

 

No, population is a consumer. Drought is about supply.

Link: USDA on drought in western states

 

It's neither new nor exceptional.
Pre-Columbian America was plagued by decades-long megadroughts
2018 › 08 › 09 › pre-columbian-america-was-plagued-by-decades-long-megadroughts
models suggest that, as the climate warms, such megadroughts are increasingly likely to return. ... a given year. The map shows four western US megadroughts predicted from tree-ring data.

 

From your cite:

 

Ritual statement to appease the Consensus Enforcement Squad. Just like Soviet-era Russian scholars who began every paper with a Lenin quote.

 

No, there is not.

California is a Temperate Mediterranean Climate, that has 7 year monsoons. In the US, this is normally known as "Desert".

Deserts are not a good place to have huge population centers.

Hell, this has been well known for over a century! The Los Angeles Aqueduct was started way back in 1905, because even when the population of the city was only around 100,000 there was just not enough water! Just think about that, there was not enough water over 100 years ago, with a population only a tiny fraction of what it is today.

They have been pumping the Owens Valley and Lake Mono dry for over a century, and now are taking water from as far away as Arizona and Northern California, and it still is not enough. In short, California has never been able to provide enough water for their population. It is a dry climate, a desert. And it made do for well over a century by pumping the hell out of their water table. TO the point where even wells are now starting to run dry, they are pulling water from the aquifer faster than the snowmelt in the Sierras can replenish it.

And as always, you just scream "scientists do not agree", with no reference. And the hype is amazing in that state about the drought. A particular target is Oroville Reservoir. Reporters love to start flooding that dam in around July every year, showing the reservoir almost completely empty and just the original river running along the base.

But funny, unless there is a reason (like when the Governor almost destroyed the dam and flooded most of the area south to Sacramento), nobody cares. Because by around March of every year, the reservoir is damned near at maximum capacity. Every single year.

Because the main purpose for it is flood control. And each fall they pretty much pump it dry, to make room for the wet winter months and spring runoff. And yes, it used to have more water in it at the end of summer, when the population of the state was a lot smaller. The main draining used to be in September-October, in order to help the salmon spawn. But not anymore. Not because of "drought", but the demands of the cities for the water.

The state still gets a hell of a lot of water. Huge areas of the state actually flood every single year. But what they lack is the ability to store enough to supply water to the people. This has been known for decades, but they are still doing nothing about it. Instead, they just take water from farther and farther away, harming those local ecosystems.

And here, let me provide something you never do.

https://cepsym.org/history/RainfallStreamRunoffSoCA_since1769.pdf

Feel free to look through this. Especially Page 22, which records rainfall in various areas of the state going back to 1864. From a report made by the state in 1931.

And then compare the rainfall levels today. Well, what in the hell do you know! Almost a century later, and the average rainfalls are the exact same! This report covers almost a century of rainfall records, and if you lay them against a chart of rainfall today, it is the same. And it even shows the cycles that average every 7 years (el niño and la niña). This is nothing new, it is just that the water is just not enough to go around anymore.

In other words, I do not give a sats rass what any of your "scientists" that live in your mind say. The facts are as I could easily prove by records over 150 years old, the rainfall has not decreased. I also proved that the population has exploded.

 

Yes. And there was never ever enough water in that area to support that insane level of population.

Therefore, the drought is man-made due to population. Not "global warming". Because I already showed that the rainfall levels are the same as they were well over a century ago.

 

Because that was real "climate change", much more severe than we are seeing today.

The continent was still in recovery from the ice age (and still is), and most of the western US was changing from wetland savannahs to the more arid climate of today. Case in point, one of the largest west coast lakes in that era was still Lake Manly. A massive lake larger than Lake Mead, in what is now Death Valley. And at the time that report is talking about, Lake Mojave was drying up. You know, in the same location that the Mojave Desert is today?

And remember, these were occurring a hell of a long time before the "global warming" that you and others are screaming about today.

So tell us, what is the "normal condition" of North America? Glaciers covering most of Canada and reaching down half the Atlantic Coast and into the Midwest? Or no ice at all? Because you can't seem to make up your mind, and insist that it remains frozen forever in some kind of fantasy setting that never was.

 

Consensus is not science.

Hell, this year alone global CO2 levels jumped by a staggering 2 ppm. How is that going to affect things?

 

So, you reject this aspect of science, too.

Why am I not even slightly surprised.

I guess you're smarter than all the blithering idiots who actually study these topics.