Pray tell, all you greeny, lefties, are you on a roster?
Hasbeen,
I think whenever answers are expected from them they huddle for two months to dream up some reply, ignorant ones mostly.
It's a crying shame to waste all this education on people who lack the mentality to want to be of help rather than hindrance to society.

@CSteele,

<<However I will admit to thinking you were made of slightly sterner stuff.>>
Indeed I am, that’s why your put-downs just “pass by me as the idle wind”

Okay, let’s put it in terms you’re more hardwired to relate to.

Let’s assume that I am a police officer and you’re a civic minded local resident.

One day you come to me and say “Officer SPQR, some young women are trashing the park. You really have to do something about and quickly “

We both go down to park and sure enough there are 100 young women spraying graffiti , turning over bins, and generally acting very badly. So I call in support and go about arresting the whole 100.

Where upon, you step in and say No! NO! I don’t want the 97 in bikinis arrested. I am only concerned with the three in burkas.Leave the other 97 be.

Do you suppose I would see you a credible, objective observer?

That is a parallel of your position with relation to CO2.
You’re telling me you are madly concerned about the bad properties of the molecule CO2.
But only 3-4 % of CO2 is derived from anthropogenic sources. For every 100 molecules in the air only three are anthropogenic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BC1l4geSTP8

So fess up now, what came first: your affiliation with the hard left or your belief in AGW?

@Poirot

<< Finance is not a science >>

Neither is AGW --it's more akin to theology

Dear SPQR,

Sigh.

What on earth are we going to do with you laddie?

You head off to these ridiculous denial sites, tout them as the bee’s knees and don't do one iota of checking.

Are you and Jayb related?

So you want me to take seriously an organization whose major benefactor is Gina Rinehart, whose major patron is Alan Jones and whose video you linked to stuffs up basic atmospheric facts in the first 30 seconds. I switched off after that.

Just for your information a couple of centuries ago there were 24 molecules of CO2 for every 85,000 of air. Man has driven a 40% increase so now there are indeed 34 molecules of CO2 and rising but to say only 1 molecule is caused by human activity is wrong, stupidly so one would have thought but knowing who is backing them probably expected. Powerful interests can exert a hell of a lot of pressure. Look how long it took to get smoking legislation up.

How best to explain it to you?

Okay, take your car, it takes very little pigment in proportion to the rest of the can of paint to give it even a dark colour but it has a relatively huge effect on how hot the surface of your car will get in the sun.

The bulk of the paint has very little effect on temperature compared to this little concentration of pigment.

Now the mechanism might not be strictly the same but the general principle is.

Don't you get a little wary of mining interests and in my view corrupt radio announcers getting inside your head?

Go think for yourself and give me an answer to my CO2 question. It can’t be ignored if you want to be taken seriously.

cSteel: We are forcing the issue by doubling the CO2 concentrations through artificial means

We are doubling the CO2 Concentration? Pray, over what time period? From when to when? Each year, 10 years, 20 years or 100 years, past present or future. CO2 is said to make up .03% of the Gasses in the Atmosphere. If it is doubled to .06% some other Gas must decrease. Being the authority that you are, which Gas is decreasing in percentage & how will that effect us.

cSteel: the physical properties of which have climate implications.

Yes of course. Co2 is absorbed by many organisms, it is essential to their life & well being. Trees need it to produce O2. If there is more CO2 for trees to use then they must output more O2. So it can’t be O2 that is decreasing. The CO2 uptake of the Oceans must also increase that would cause an increase on Carbonates, which would be good for the production of shelled organisms. Wouldn't it. Then the increase in rain & storms would encourage tree growth (more O2) Storms produce Nitrogen, which is a natural fertilizer, which in turn encourages tree growth (more O2) Yes, some places will get wetter, some dryer, but if we manage the water correctly then there won't be a problem moving it around with Solar pumps. There are places where it has been too cold to produce food. (e.g. Siberia) These places will be warmer & so produce more food. Those people in dryer climates will either have to move or die off, which is Nature’s way anyway.

You mustn't read my posts at all. I have always maintained that I believe in Global Warming. Just not in a Left Wing, Greenie, PC way. Luv ya.

Jayb...thats an interesting hypnosis "a trance state characterized by extreme suggestibility, relaxation and heightened imagination." woops! I meant hypothesis "an assumption or concession made for the sake of argument b: an interpretation of a practical situation or condition taken as the ground for action.....So, the warm countries shall fail and the once inhospitable one's become flourishing Mecca's.

Enough said:)

cc

Gee that's interesting csteele, where do I find this dark CO2?

Is it anything like the pollution our greenies, & your ABC manage to see, every time they find a photo of the steam rising from a power house cooling tower?

Tell me, do you ever become even a little embarrassed by these fraudulent images used by your mates to try to further the cause, or are you so used to using any untruth that you no longer notice?

Oh in passing, I'm sure you will have noticed the paper from NASA on ten years of satellite measurement of heat escaping the earth to space.

It has to been found to be so much greater than the figures used in all those nice computer models, that all the equations will have to be totally revamped. If they are supposed to find the truth that is. Should we hold our breath waiting?

So you can let those clowns at UEA know they no longer have to spend their time looking for their lost heat. The planet lost it years ago, just as a good little planet should.

Then would you suggest to them, they can now find a real job. We have a shortage of land scape gardeners here. Now that is a job that could use those fertile imaginations, & they won't even need a computer model.