CO2 levels too low?

[chuckChuck]

I only keep repeating myself because you and your club members keep repeating your bizarre unscientific theories and untruths.

Dangerously low CO2 levels is wacky idea. They were significantly lower in the mid 1800s and have been rising ever since. But don’t let scientific facts get in the way of your thinking!

If CO2 is dangerously low and cooling is occurs wouldn’t the glaciers in the Rockies be growing? They are still shrinking!

The Human caused climate change period of the last 170 years or so iS the period most relevant to the increase in CO2 levels and human impact.

All other eras prior to this period are irrelevant to measuring human impact.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

I only keep repeating myself because you and your club members keep repeating your bizarre unscientific theories and untruths.

Dangerously low CO2 levels is wacky idea. They were significantly lower in the mid 1800s and have been rising ever since. But don’t let scientific facts get in the way of your thinking!

So there you have it folks. Any scientist who dares to point out the evidence of much higher CO2 levels in earths geological history is unscientific, speaking untruths, wacky, bizarre etc. Sounds like a good starting point to have an open rational scientific debate about the dangers of or unprecedented nature of our current dismal levels of CO2.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

I would say there isn't enough heavy breathing going on in your house.

Ache4acres hasn't yet responded to your suggestion. I assume that means that he is performing the experiment, and showing his true dedication to science, has had to repeat it over and over to get reliable repeatable results.

[chuckChuck]

If you are so worried about global cooling look up up what is the cause of the glacial periods. There are several factors. None of which is having a significant impact at the moment.

Human caused climate change period data is the most important because the periods prior to human influence had millions of years of other causes. The earth is a few billions of years old. Do you think the billions of years of the planets history is relative to the last 170?

Where do you think all the carbon from burning millions of barrels of oil and other fossil fuels is going? Is it all “just soot“ as you once said? LOL

[AlbertaFarmer5]

If you are so worried about global cooling look up up what is the cause of the glacial periods. There are several factors. None of which is having a significant impact at the moment.

Human caused climate change period data is the most important because the periods prior to human influence had millions of years of other causes. The earth is a few billions of years old. Do you think the billions of years of the planets history is relative to the last 170?

Where do you think all the carbon from burning millions of barrels of oil and other fossil fuels is going? Is it all “just soot“ as you once said? LOL

Well, thanks for clarifying that. So for millions of years, there were other causes, now there is just humans...
And historical lack of corellation between CO2 and temp (97% of the time there has been no corellation) is not relevant today, only models.
Got it.

[chuckChuck]

Never ever said it was just humans. Significant Natural changes Took place over 1000s and 10000s of years,a very different time scale compared to human caused changes since the industrial revolution.

It’s a good thing we have you to explain the history of the worlds climate in a few sentences. All those 1000s of climate and geo scientists I guess there not needed. It can all be explained by a small group of skeptical farmers who barely understand the difference between weather and climate. LOL

[chuckChuck]

I hope you got something done today? Thanks to auto steer I got 250 acres seeded while chatting with you listening to music. Sure makes the day go faster.

[rumrocks]

Chuck I sense you are in favor of reducing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.

Assuming you ran a scandal free campaign and were elected leader of the world, how would you reduce CO2
levels without causing world economies to slow down, which would lead to more poverty and deaths, remembering what this present slow down has done.

A natural reduction of oil use through progressive taxation would only be a slower death for many.

There are more people, some high profile, rolling off the climate change band wagon.

Do you think you will ever at some point in time really start to question this movements validity and the wealth transfer that is taking place under the guise of climate cooling/warming . . . .they made sure to cover both directions, that way the probability of being wrong is very close to zero.

If some liberal MP's came forward and said the carbon dioxide tax was a hoax, would that start some skepticism in your thinking or would the UN have to admit their scientists have miscalculated the effect of CO2 on global warming/cooling or what if Al Gore said it's all a scam. What would it take?

Or would you and a small group of diehards still be on the battlefield hill swinging your empty guns.

[A990]

I hope you got something done today? Thanks to auto steer I got 250 acres seeded while chatting with you listening to music. Sure makes the day go faster.

....u bet! 👍

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Chuck I sense you are in favor of reducing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.

Assuming you ran a scandal free campaign and were elected leader of the world, how would you reduce CO2
levels without causing world economies to slow down, which would lead to more poverty and deaths, remembering what this present slow down has done.

A natural reduction of oil use through progressive taxation would only be a slower death for many.

There are more people, some high profile, rolling off the climate change band wagon.

Do you think you will ever at some point in time really start to question this movements validity and the wealth transfer that is taking place under the guise of climate cooling/warming . . . .they made sure to cover both directions, that way the probability of being wrong is very close to zero.

If some liberal MP's came forward and said the carbon dioxide tax was a hoax, would that start some skepticism in your thinking or would the UN have to admit their scientists have miscalculated the effect of CO2 on global warming/cooling or what if Al Gore said it's all a scam. What would it take?

Or would you and a small group of diehards still be on the battlefield hill swinging your empty guns.

You are wasting your time, I've asked similar question, about his line in the sand. The response seems to indicate that there is none, as is to be expected from an idealogue. Like any adherent to a religious cult, you don't dare question the belief.

On the other side of the equation, if you ask any realist what evidence it would take to change their mind, they will have a reasonable answer, likely with a quantifiable metric, and within a short time frame.