PBO Report on Carbon tax

[AlbertaFarmer5]

I think Chuck may be beginning to understand the difference between pollution and beneficial plant food.

I admit, I was wrong. Chuck does not understand the difference.

Photosynthesis is just another conspiracy theory invented by the flat earth climate change deniers.

[cropgrower]

Yes A5 try living in a room full of only "beneficial plant food"!

That should be good for you! Right! LOL

CO2 in excess is considered a pollutant by science! Get it?

"the emission of carbon dioxide (CO₂) has been considered as one of the main sources of air pollution, leading to a serious concern due to its climatic effects as greenhouse gas (GHG).?"

when are the levels of CO2 projected to start going down now that we are paying carbon tax ?? that must be known ? or is this carbon tax just a bottomless pit with nobody having a clue of outcome ?

[AlbertaFarmer5]

when the levels of CO2 projected to start going down now that we are paying carbon tax ?? that must be known ? or is this carbon tax just a bottomless pit with nobody having a clue of outcome ?

And more importantly, after that when should we expect the weather to improve?

[chuckChuck]

A5 are you still struggling with the difference between climate and weather too? LOL

How as your experience in a room with only "beneficial plant food"? Were you a bit short of breath?

Or did you start growing again like a vegetable?

[AlbertaFarmer5]

A5 are you still struggling with the difference between climate and weather too? LOL

How as your experience in a room with only "beneficial plant food"? Were you a bit short of breath?

Or did you start growing again like a vegetable?

Chuck, since you have recently revealed your aversion to using statistics to further your understanding of anything,. I will keep ridiculing you with this newfound revelation.

Considering that the atmosphere currently has just over 400 parts per million of co2. And it doesn't even begin to become toxic in any way until at least 10,000 parts per million.
What do you think is the statistical probability that we will ever burn enough fossil fuels to achieve toxic levels of CO2 in the atmosphere?
Should I start worrying?

Given the currently known fossil fuel reserves on earth, do you think it is more statistically probable that CO2 levels in the atmosphere will reach toxic levels or that they will resume their relentless decline towards starvation levels?

[chuckChuck]

I never said CO2 would reach toxic levels, only that it causes global warming which is all backed up by science!

Which you think is wrong! LOL

So don't waste your time talking about irrelevant toxicity.

A5, the "farmer" from Alberta who thinks NASA and all the other world class scientific organizations are wrong!

What a laugh!

Give up!