Meme

Yes you are correct – humans are living longer – more specifically in developed countries thanks to medical science. However, hundreds of thousands are ill from air pollution and hundreds of thousands are dying from industrial pollution.

I know plenty of elderly people. I know very few "long lived" who aren't on a bucket load of pills (except myself.) Then everyone probably knows someone who’s walking around without a prostate, one bung lung, asthma, cardio-vascular disease, diabetes (rampant) one breast (or none at all), a colostomy bag attached to their belly, kidney disease or muscular and neurological diseases - have a look at yourself sport!

“What would the climate have to do at this point to prove the theory was 100% dead wrong?"

CO2 is not a theory – it’s a fact and you have failed to produce any evidence to prove the "theory was dead wrong.” You are a miserable failure. Worse your tactics are just as hazardous as the tar sands you mine in Canada. Why does the description: “a hypocritical troll” come to mind when I think of you?

Your “theories” were demolished when you first inflicted yourself on debaters on OLO.

When one poster requests a specific response from another, it is courteous to acknowledge that poster.

You have not at any time entered into debating with anyone and we have had to endure your spurious and moronic tirades.

“Fear when used as the only motivator always clouds the issue”

Indeed Meme and your terror is obvious to all. Why not cease frothing at the mouth and address your psychotic rants. Take a Prozac! Even top dogs in the deniers’ camp would be embarrassed having you on their side but unfortunately for them, beating a cretin over the head with a club would be totally ineffectual.

The rate of cooling has increased : (http://www.drroyspencer.com/library/pics/UAH_... ).
Only 5% of greenhouse effect is caused by carbon dioxide. Humans produce only 5% of carbon dioxide emissions with the United States only producing a quarter of that. Therefore we account for less than .07% of greenhouse gas emissions

No MeMeMine you *boring* and oh so *PREDICTABLE* little troll.

I was waiting for the predictable punch-line to your stupid little game. Here I was here discussing things rather pleasantly with Kalin, but you kept farting your stench into the forum and finally I responded. I knew you were PRETENDING to ask "What would it take to disprove the global warming theory?" just so you could rant another one of your retarded little mantras. So I participated in your moronic little game, just to watch it unfold.

I said, "It would have to cool down" just to watch you trot out your moronic myth. How utterly predictable that you'd quote one of your anti-science heroes.

Instead, what we find is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record_since_1880

This summary of the *NOAA data* clear states: "Each of the last 12 years (1997-2008) was one of the warmest on record, although the last two years have grown cooler, not warmer (see chart below). These years could be the warmest years for the last several thousand years according to the temperature record, not just since 1880, but the most recent data is the most accurate.[3]"

Don't jump the gun, the last 2 years are STILL in the TOP 9 hottest years. La Nina IS a strong climate forcing, but not strong enough to totally cancel decades of warming. This is the REAL science.

If you want to read the REAL level of forcings for Co2 compared to water vapour etc, google IPCC.

I'm outta here. You win... go ahead and post an infinite number of replies. Make sure you keep writing "23 years!" The longer you spend posting in this thread, the less time you'll spend spewing your our unutterably boring vomitous stench into other forums. Goodbye.

PS: If you ever demonstrate that you are capable of a decent conversation, I'll apologise for everything stated above. I believe in giving PEOPLE second chances. But until then, you are a troll and poison to a good forum. (Which sadly this ISN'T as moderators should have cleaned up this thread long ago and banned you!)

Apologies Kalin, those damn word limits preceded my obtuse answer to your question 3. Besides, this Plimer thread has run its course - I wanted to end on topic.

At the risk of over-simplification, try and think of it this way:

Yes, there is a log relationship. However, what many people (sceptics and non-sceptics alike) fail to appreciate is that the upper atmosphere is not restricted (or constricted) to a defined boundary layer. The log relationship you allude to is all well and good for a fixed container or 'closed' system. But, the troposphere is not fixed. It can 'expand' upwards as we pump more CO2 up there - like we are enveloped in a big elastic balloon.

We are 'pumping' more CO2 out there (we are doing that exponentially as well) and however fast we are doing it, the troposphere will adjust (equilibrate - remember Newton's Laws?) in height accordingly. Ergo, we are far from 'saturating' the atmosphere for the log relationship to limit the rise in mean global temperature to 2-3 degrees C for a doubling of CO2-e concentration.

I hope that helps.

Isn’t there a consensus of scientific opinion on man-made global warming?
“Of course not because claims of both consensus and doubting from scientists can't be denied. "The science is done, clear and accessible.", according to the IPCC. Not only is it clear and accessible, it's quite understandable so you are under no obligation as an intelligent human being to surrender yourself to the priests of science. Only 5% of greenhouse effect is caused by carbon dioxide. Humans produce only 5% of carbon dioxide emissions with the United States only producing a quarter of that. Therefore we account for less than .07% of greenhouse gas emissions.”

Is the world heating up? How would we know?
“Ask yourself how witch burners knew if their particular craft worked. When you experience a climate crisis, let us know will you? And melting ice does not prove what caused it outside of emotional liberal panic and cave man like ignorance. "Ug! Ug! Cave man see strange thing. Must be my fault?"

Hasn’t the Earth’s climate alternated in the past between ice ages and warming periods?
“Just the fact that this ridiculous question has to be answered is proof that this not about science. It's officially now superstition.”

Does man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) contribute to global Warming?
“Like farting in a tornado and 23 years of warnings proves it. If this global warming was so powerful as to be able to destroy the planet, this magical global warming crisis should have started by now.”

How do we know what the climate will be in the future?
“We obviously don't. It's still a mystery. Just imagine a world where we knew all about climate. Just think how different things would be. Do you see that world? Of course not.”
The Big Picture:
“While the subject of climate change is complex, there is a common theme that runs throughout the theory of man-made global warming: Nature was in balance before human industrial activity began. But science does not support this naïve and romantic view of nature.”

Debate deniers at the world's largest open forum on global warming at:
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warming