$3 trillion per year to 2050 to reduce CO2 from the historic 7,000 PPM according to U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen

[CrusaderFrank]

I am absolutely convinced that NOT dealing with it now will cost us CONSIDERABLY more in the future.

Go chain yourself to the Chinese embassy

 

[otto105]

maga fuckups

Go ahead and try to disprove the relationship between CO2 and temperature.

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/sites/def...a feedback between carbon dioxide and climate.

 

[Stryder50]

Not germane to our current human caused warming.

Maybe this will help you.

Humans are responsible for a significant amount of CO2 in the atmosphere | Fact check

400 ppm = 400/1,000,00 = 1/2,500

You need to show how "heat" retained by one part transfers to the other 2,499 parts to make them as warm as the one part.
Also, using natural laws of chemistry and physics.

Your link is more propaganda from the deluded and those with political who lie and distort.

When can we expect YOU personally to stop making CO2 ?

 

[otto105]

400 ppm = 400/1,000,00 = 1/2,500

You need to show how "heat" retained by one part transfers to the other 2,499 parts to make them as warm as the one part.
Also, using natural laws of chemistry and physics.

Your link is more propaganda from the deluded and those with political who lie and distort.

When can we expect YOU personally to stop making CO2 ?

The link is to the climate scientists at NOAA.

You're the biased piece of shit trying and failing to deny the science behind AGW.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

maga fuckups

Go ahead and try to disprove the relationship between CO2 and temperature.

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-11/8 - Temperature Change and Carbon Dioxide Change - FINAL OCT 2021.pdf#:~:text=When the carbon dioxide concentration goes down, temperature,with a feedback between carbon dioxide and climate.

There’s a 450,000 year dataset showing CO2 LAGGING temperature on both increase AND decrease in all 450,000 years!!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

maga fuckups

Go ahead and try to disprove the relationship between CO2 and temperature.

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-11/8 - Temperature Change and Carbon Dioxide Change - FINAL OCT 2021.pdf#:~:text=When the carbon dioxide concentration goes down, temperature,with a feedback between carbon dioxide and climate.

So either China cuts their output or the USA spends $78 Trillion all by ourselves?

USA contributes 15% of total output why are paying 100% of the cost?

 

[otto105]

There’s a 450,000 year dataset showing CO2 LAGGING temperature on both increase AND decrease in all 450,000 years!!!!

Again, if you're so invested in that deflection why is no scientific organization taking that view? Why did the scientists at Exxon Mobil come to that conclusion in the 1970's. They correctly predicted the planet would warm as CO2 accumulated in our atmosphere from burning their product.

What can you show that proves CO2 has nothing to do with our current rapid warming. Surely Lord Muckington has something for you.

 

[otto105]

So either China cuts their output or the USA spends $78 Trillion all by ourselves?

USA contributes 15% of total output why are paying 100% of the cost?

This is not a scientific argument against climate change.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Again, if you're so invested in that deflection why is no scientific organization taking that view? Why did the scientists at Exxon Mobil come to that conclusion in the 1970's. They correctly predicted the planet would warm as CO2 from their burning their product.

What can you show that proves CO2 has nothing to do with our current rapid warming. Surely Lord Muckington has something for you.

Appealing to authorities = logic fail

Can you explain why modern CO2 differs from the 450,000 year long dataset

 

[otto105]

Appealing to authorities = logic fail

Can you explain why modern CO2 differs from the 450,000 year long dataset

The burning of fossil fuels since the Industrial age.

Sourcing Scientists is using subject matter experts.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This is not a scientific argument against climate change.

Why should the USA pay more than its 15% share?

 

[otto105]

Why should the USA pay more than its 15% share?

Because we are an exceptional nation.

We should be pushing hard to develop the new technology to lead instead of allowing China to bring it and profit from it.

And nice quota system frank.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

This is not a scientific argument against climate change.

It's an argument against money laundering by the political left around the world.

 

[otto105]

It's an argument against money laundering by the political left around the world.

Money laundering?

Explain.

 

[Stryder50]

The link is to the climate scientists at NOAA.

You're the biased piece of shit trying and failing to deny the science behind AGW.

NO!

I'm waiting for someone to prove the science in the classic and traditional way, through laboratory replication of their theories.
So far no one has done that.

A reminder, that a few hundred years ago the world body of "scientists" believed the Earth was the center of the universe and the Sun and planets revolved around the Earth. Galileo proved them wrong using science, but it was a few decades before those doubters became convinced they were wrong.

NOAA scientists say what they are paid to say.

 

[otto105]

NO!

I'm waiting for someone to prove the science in the classic and traditional way, through laboratory replication of their theories.
So far no one has done that.

A reminder, that a few hundred years ago the world body of "scientists" believed the Earth was the center of the universe and the Sun and planets revolved around the Earth. Galileo proved them wrong using science, but it was a few decades before those doubters became convinced they were wrong.

NOAA scientists say what they are paid to say.

Religion forced the people to believe the earth was flat. Science proved it round.

You can read the IPCC, EPA, NOAA or any other scientific organization.

The Science of Climate Change Explained: Facts, Evidence and Proof

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Because we are an exceptional nation.

We should be pushing hard to develop the new technology to lead instead of allowing China to bring it and profit from it.

And nice quota system frank.

China has double our CO2 and pays nothing???

You see why we question your “science”

 

[martybegan]

Religion forced the people to believe the earth was flat. Science proved it round.

You can read the IPCC, EPA, NOAA or any other scientific organization.

The Science of Climate Change Explained: Facts, Evidence and Proof

Actually that was conventional wisdom at one time, and the real debate was geocentric vs. heliocentric.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Global warming means USA spends $78 Trillion while double our CO2 Chi-na spends nothing?

Makes sense

 

[otto105]

The greenhouse effect has been widely known in the scientific field for over 100 years.

You Amish scientists need to catch up.