CO2 Reduction Targets

[Kosh]

Funny how deniers reject the temperature projections of climate scientists out of hand, but the out-of-date, pro-fossil-fuel energy source predictions are absolute gospel from which reality is verboten to deviate.

So other than spreading your AGW scriptures, maybe you could post some actual science to back up your religion.

How about the datasets with source code that proves your religious beliefs.

Perhaps this is what you are looking for.


EdGCM - Model II

I gotta wonder how that's gonna help you.

As always the AGW cult post things that do not support their religious beliefs.

As always they post AGW religious dogma.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Seriously, what is wrong with using a natural resource such as the sun for our energy?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Funny how deniers reject the temperature projections of climate scientists out of hand, but the out-of-date, pro-fossil-fuel energy source predictions are absolute gospel from which reality is verboten to deviate.

So spending $70 trillion on green energy will drop 2080 temperatures by how much?

2080 CO2 levels by how much? Exactly what will we get for all that spending?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Seriously, what is wrong with using a natural resource such as the sun for our energy?

There is nothing wrong with it.

If you want more expensive, less reliable energy.

I think you should do it.

You should also refuse the taxpayer subsidy.

 

[boedicca]

what are the reduction goals?

Whatever they are, they will never be enough...and will be constantly revised to be more and more stringent until Leftwing Progressives achieve their goal of a collectivist system in which the Prog Elite get to live luxurious lifestyles supported by a vast subsistence level peasantry.

The poor are so much easier to control.

 

[itfitzme]

So other than spreading your AGW scriptures, maybe you could post some actual science to back up your religion.

How about the datasets with source code that proves your religious beliefs.

Perhaps this is what you are looking for.


EdGCM - Model II

I gotta wonder how that's gonna help you.

As always the AGW cult post things that do not support their religious beliefs.

As always they post AGW religious dogma.

Do you even know what that graph is of?

And you still haven't explained what good the data and source code is for you.

So far, you're batting 100% on using words you don't understand. Shit, I have a parrot that I taught to repeat the same shit to get a cracker. Polly wanta cracker?

What your oblivious to is I've got no clue what that source code says. But you wanted it and have demonstrated what an idiot you are for asking for it in the first place. You can't read FORTRAN, C+, or even TIBASIC. Only a moron asks for something they can't understand in their lifetime.

Face it, Kosh, you wouldn't know the difference between Maxwell's equations and the Black-Scholes model.

Your relentless drivel it simply mind numbing. Are you even capable of an original thought or just relegated to reposting the same non-sense you read some where without a clue what it is?

It's one thing to have question about the science. It's another thing to have no clue what it is.

 

[Crick]

I think it's important that he also either has no idea or simply does not care what willful deceptions went into the creation of that graph. Roy Spencer marked himself as having completely abandoned whatever scientific principles he possessed when he crafted and published that graph. Everyone here has heard the story. Kosh either does not understand or does not care. No matter which, though, he is knowingly posting a falsehood.

 

[itfitzme]

I think it's important that he also either has no idea or simply does not care what willful deceptions went into the creation of that graph. Roy Spencer marked himself as having completely abandoned whatever scientific principles he possessed when he crafted and published that graph. Everyone here has heard the story. Kosh either does not understand or does not care. No matter which, though, he is knowingly posting a falsehood.

It isn't a model of global mean temprature.

 

[jc456]

I think it's important that he also either has no idea or simply does not care what willful deceptions went into the creation of that graph. Roy Spencer marked himself as having completely abandoned whatever scientific principles he possessed when he crafted and published that graph. Everyone here has heard the story. Kosh either does not understand or does not care. No matter which, though, he is knowingly posting a falsehood.

Well, why not just show the experiment that shows what 120 PPM of CO2 does to temperatures? I'd say it is you who has no idea and does not care. Me I care, and why I actually ask the question. I'm an inquisitive guy. So far you're batting .000. That's a big swing and miss and no contact!

 

[Crick]

That you've been shown the experiments and their results yet continue to ask "the question" tells us you're an ignorant, amoral twit and there is no benefit whatsoever to be had talking with you.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

That you've been shown the experiments and their results yet continue to ask "the question" tells us you're an ignorant, amoral twit and there is no benefit whatsoever to be had talking with you.

Been shown some irrelevant charts, haven't been shown one experiment.

 

[Crick]

Liar