mhaze

The graph shows when CO2 has been measured to be 340ppm, then the expected temperature increase is 0.4C. The 0.4C increase related to beginning of the 21 century. When I went to school graphs were read using horizontal and vertical lines

At 380ppm CO2, the temperature will increase to 0.8C according to the graph.

But, I suspect you know that, but it is something difficult to acknowledge.

mhaze, what is the current increase in temperature over pre-Industrial times?

Alan B, if what you were saying is correct then the turbines in the
power house would be red hot from the heat.
There would be no point in building them and we would not have any electricity.

ant,

You surely can't be this innumerate. I feel you must surely now be in the phase where you know you've screwed up and are now trying to avoiding admitting it by making a fool of yourself.

But on the off chance that you really don't get it, see if you can follow this exercise.

According to the graph:

when approximately will CO2 levels reach 340ppm
when approximately will CO2 levels reach 380ppm
when approximately will temperatures reach 0.4c above baseline
when approximately will temperatures reach 0.8c above baseline

Answer those questions correctly and perhaps you'll understand why you've got all this so very very wrong.

THEN, if all else fails and you still can't nut it out, go check Table 4 on page 31 of the report.

THEN show us that you retain a modicum of honour by coming back and admitting you got it all wrong.

mhaze

I have asked a Maths teacher to check my interpretation of the graph, and she says your wrong.
The graph was about a projection of CO2 levels into the future with the expected increase in temperature over pre-Industrial times. If you read science you would understand that to be true. Mauna Loa maintains constant updates of CO2 emissions, we obtain temperature updates periodically, it is another way of showing how you are wrong without using the graph reference.
Scientists were right in their projection of temperature increase almost 40 years ago.

You haven't answered my question about how the 1998 datum isn't used any more by deniers, I'm not surprised. I have asked that question a number of times elsewhere. The answer is an embarrassment for deniers.
Also, you have not answered my question about what the current increase in temperature has been since the pre-Industrial period.

Your insistence of trying to down grade temperature, places you in the denier group of anthropogenic climate change.

mhaze,
1. No, the commercial decision to close Hazelwood was not based on government bias. It was based on the cost of fixing the safety problems.

2. Considering people have been successfully sued for libel by implication, I don't think your objection is valid. He made a claim that was misleading.

3. I concur that "The author specifically said what his percentages refer to."*
And he specifically got his figures WRONG!

Considering their relative proportions in the atmosphere, it's IMPOSSIBLE for the figures he supplied to be what he says they were. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

* Technically he only said what one of his percentages referred to; it was implied the other two referred to the same thing.

Hey ant.

One graph you should be looking at is the famous "hockey stick" graph invented by that star of HIGW, Professor Michael Manne. It clearly shows how the industrial revolution was the cause of HIGW because that is when global temperatures supposedly began to rise.

The only problem with the professor's graph was that even a dumb electrician like me knows about the Roman Warm Period, the Medieval Warm Period (when global temps.were 2 degrees hotter than today) , The Little Ice Age, and other natural variables in global climate which Manne conveniently forgot to put on his graph.

Naturally, climate scientist Tim Ball pointed out that Manne's graph was pure nonsense and got sued by Michael Manne. They went to court and Tim Ball won. In a court of law, one of the main luminaries of HIGW can not convince a judge or a jury that his "research" is valid.

But it is easy to understand why HIGW advocates like Manne are so desperate to shut up respected critics of HIGW like Tim Ball. Manne came from nowhere to a respected position of power and prestige by simply fabricating evidence he knew the PC brigade wanted to hear. He is the Jussie Smollet of the socialists who so desperately want to blame a supposed global catastrophe on free market capitalism. Like Smollet and his fabricated tale of racial and homophobic attack by Trump supporters, he is telling them what they want to hear. And they are lapping it up like the media did with Smollet, without bothering to see if it is true.

Look ant, like Smollett's hoax,this whole Human Induced Global Warming hoax is starting to unravel. It is time for you to figure out that you have been had. You got played like a fish by socialists who knew how to appeal to your youthful idealism. Now, that may be a particularly unpleasant piece of crow to eat, but the sooner you tuck in, the sooner you can go back to deluding yourself that you are a "progressive" individual of high intelligence and unmatched virtue