Dear Alison Jane,

My experience in reading your posts has been that you either ignore or have a deep ignorance about the physics of climate change.

But I'm a sucker for punishment so can you please tell me what physical property of CO2 would you like me to ignore to be able to say it has had no impact on global warming?

Well Aiden, don't you think that you are being presumptuous coming on OLO and telling posters who oppose your viewpoint on HIGW that they are morons, without being able to present a reasoned argument supporting your own view? It makes me think that your beliefs have no grounding in research, and that you are just parrotting the fashionable views of the brahmin caste of people that you identify with, whom you think are rooly, rooly smart and that therefore, they must be right?

I have mentioned this to other Alarmists and they have always denied it. But at least they have been able to put up a fight. You on the other hand seem like a classic case of a young man who simply accepts what he thinks is the accepted wisdom of his peers, but who has never bothered to impartially examine the facts.

I have a feeling that you are going to disappear into cybespace and we on OLO will never see or hear from you again.

If you really do believe that you are smart, then start acting smart. Put aside you prejudices (which is almost impossible to do) and impartially examine both the Alarmist and Denier sides of the question and see who has the better argument. Simply thinking that Alarmists are smart and Deniers are dumb, and you want to identify with the smart people, is not a smart way to think.

If I were you, I would start with Michael Manne's infamous "Hockey Stick Graph" which was the basis of the first UN IPCC report, which is self evidently false, and which according to author Mark Steyn, is still being taught as fact in Canadian textbooks. It was such an embarrassment to the UN IPCC that they no longer even use it.

Once you realise that this example was not just a lie, it was a really bad lie that effortlessly collapsed under objective scrutiny, you might start to figure out how easy it was to pull the wool over well meaning and decent young people like yourself.

Well Professor Steel-rednuts, its hard to do that in OLO comment space. BUT, first I suggest you look at how CO2 molecules (thats one carbon atom plus two oxygen atoms) responds to incoming solar radiation.

Next check out how the CO2 molecule responds to this. Here ends lesson one. Get back to me when you have worked that is important to you beloved Climate Change Cult scam.

Okay Steelredux. I know you won't respond to my posts, because I have put your face in the mud too many times. But I will answer that question for you because I am in love with Alison Jane.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and changing the composition of our atmosphere by pumping out huge quantities of CO2 SHOULD increase temperatures. But is it doing that in the sort of timelines being shrieked by Alarmists? Despite huge increases of CO2 in the last fifty years, CO2 remains only a trace gas in our atmosphere. Has there been any measurable difference in our environment because of increased CO2? Yes, there has. CO2 is plant food and agronomists the world over are talking about "The Greening of the Earth" because of increased CO2 levels.

For 600 million years, the level of CO2 in our atmosphere has been steadily declining, as CO2 has become locked up in carbonaceous rocks such as limestone and coal. This coincided with a steady decline in temperature. But while this might suggest a causal link, a more detailed examination of data suggests that this may be incorrect. Within that 600 million year epoch, temperatures have sometimes climbed sharply while CO2 levels dropped sharply, while sometimes temperatures dropped sharply while CO2 levels rose steeply.

This may indicate that CO2 is not so important in determining global temperatures. It is hard to say, because something like 20 different factors affect global temperatures.

But if you wish to reduce CO2 emissions because you reasonably assume it may affect global temperatures, then I don't see a problem with that. What I have a problem with, is a political/religious movement that shrieks and intimidates, and insists that unless we completely destroy western economies right now, and replace them with (?) then we are all gunna die. And if we don't destroy our whole way of living RIGHT NOW, and admit how virtuous and intelligent they are, they will glue themselves to roadways

Alan et al,
For the MSR, no system arrangements have been signed, but a memorandum of understanding to allow for collaborative R&D by interested members has been signed by Euratom, France, Russia, Switzerland, Canada, USA and Australia. China, Japan and Korea are observers. Terrestrial Energy joined it in 2019 after two years with observer status. There will be a long lead time to prototypes, and the R&D orientation has changed since the project was set up, due to increased interest. It now has two baseline concepts:
The Molten Salt Fast Neutron Reactor (MSFR), which will take in thorium fuel cycle, recycling of actinides, closed Th/U fuel cycle with no U enrichment, with enhanced safety and minimal wastes.
The Advanced High-Temperature Reactor (AHTR) – also known as the fluoride salt-cooled high-temperature reactor (FHR) – with the same graphite and solid fuel core structures as the VHTR and molten salt as coolant instead of helium, enabling power densities 4 to 6 times greater than HTRs and power levels up to 4000 MWt with passive safety systems. The TMSR Research Centre is constructing a small solid-fuel simulator (TMSR-SF0) at Shanghai Institute of Nuclear Applied Physics (SINAP, under the China Academy of Sciences) with a 2020 target for operation. It will be followed by a 10 MWt prototype, TMSR-SF1.
The GIF 2014 Roadmap said that a lot of work needed to be done on salts before demonstration reactors were operational, and suggested 2025 as the end of the viability R&D phase.The main research needs, according to the China Academy of Sciences, which leads world R&D on them, are fuel treatment, materials and reliability.

Hello Steel rednuts why no wtty remote from my or Lego's (very generous) free science lesson..perhaps your delicate little ego fingers an ",wewner" has been super glued to some Glasgow pub floor.