Member Info for BoomerBower

It was 0.018% at the end of the last glaciation. Life came perilously close to exstinction due to a dearth of co2. Had it fallen below 0.015% there would be no complex life forms on this planet at all.

And below 0.015% co2 all complex life forms on earth die very quickly due to death of plants. C3 photosynthesirs evolved when co2 was around 1000ppm so are relatively co2 starved in the current environment, this is why greenhouse growers pump in co2 to increase yield.

0.04%. It was 0.4% just 500m years ago and has fallen steadily since. Since we are 2.6m years in to the Quaternary ice age I don't think we have too much to worry about. You won't read about the Quaternary in the Guardian because it doesn't fit the narrative. In fact earth had not had an ice in 260m years. So on a geologic time scale the planet is certainly relatively cool and this notion it will boil/overheat is utterly preposterous.

Gavstar you can't differentiate between correlation and causation. If co2 was earth climate knob the fact it was ten times higher during the Cambrian seems to have escaped your attention. In more recent history co2 was lower during the Warm Medieval Period and earth was warmer. So it seems it's not the only factor after all. Possibly because the sun is the driver of our climate and not a very weak greenhouse gas which absorbs infra red on an incredibly narrow spectrum which is basically saturated anyway. The climate will have the final say on this not a show of paud off hands and prove this nonsense.

Was the impeachment planned by Trump himself? I'm starting to think it was given the absolute carnage for democrats in the polls. The 2020 election resembles a Victorian big game hunter encircling democrats and taking pot shots. The impeachment has killed Biden dead. Next Bloomberg is facing Trump's blunderbuss. Bloomberg is a real threat, until the moment he speaks. Then there is mayor Pete....

Precisely tfe it's a new form of Canutism. The scientific properties of co2 DO NOT support the theory. Absorption of infra red is logarithmic not linear so increasing co2 has bugger all impact. Even their nonsense models know this so they created an interaction term with water vapour for which there is no evidential basis at all. The whole thing rests on that utterly tenuous assumption which wasn't observed in the geologic record anyway when co2 was ten times higher. You can't be a denier of a model assumption that has no evidence. The null hypothesis says you must assume it's not true anyway.

Muscorum so far the small amount of warming we've had has been beneficial as has the greening of the planet caused by higher co2. That has created the equivalent of an extra continent in vegetation. Are you saying that's bad? Where is all this bad stuff, oh is the ocean acidification bs, oh the coral reef bs, oh the polar bs. Polar bear numbers up not down hunting was the problem there. Coral reef still there Peter Ridd exposed that fraud.

Why would we want to go EV after considering production and usage co2 of electric EV is only produce 20% less co2 than standard car over a lifetime over a lifetime . That also assumes the batteries don't lose their range fast which they probably will. Why anyone think filthy lithium batteries are cleaner than the combustion engine is a mystery. Co2 is plant food not a pollutant anyway and certainly not earth's climate dial. Before the normal air heads respond just consider where every carbon atom in your body came from?

Might be an idea Eccles you guess as good as mine.

I'd also point out Attenborough is a film maker with a 5th rate understanding of the science.

Gavstarr the ice cores show co2 lagging temp in perfect line with Henry's law. So actually those disprove this nonsense co2 theory better than anything else.

M_wall the transition should be to fusion not burning trees and inefficient wind farms. Your point on energy density is spot on.

Compass agree we can continue ripping up the surface of planet earth in the green revolution (see Borneo wrecked, biomass (California's forest destroyed) windfarms and solar farms) or we can use the plentiful supply of energy buried in earth namely coal and oil. A revolution that claims to save earth that wrecks it is an odd spectacle.

Couple of weeks till this management pyramid scheme, I mean bank, announces results. Anyone got any predictions?

Crickey I didn't realise ppl as dim witted as you existed newboy. Care to argue a case, no because you are very unscientific and actually fairly stupid. Do even know what co2 even is but you ",know" it's the devil. Please stop breathing because you newboy are emitting 38000 ppm. Do us all a favour go co2 (not carbon) neutral?

They already doubled electricity prices thanks to the climate change bill. So they'll probably double/triple them again to get the revenue. That and scraping cash will give them total control of our lives. And once the grid isn't producing enough energy due to the green cr@p smart meters can ration power.

Stage of course what we are seeing is an attack on the middle class and working class. Car ownership will fall massively, look how much more expensive these cars are and they don't even work as well. It's simply a huge tax on the poor to divert money to the ruling class.

Eccles littering pi££es me off too Eccles. What's in the ocean is mostly from Asian rivers though. We can dispose of litter better but we are actually pretty good.

Let's not get too carried away with plastic hysteria, Attenborough cutting open gizzard feeders and claiming they are eating rocks and plastics is laughable and totally unscientific, in fact he's just a plain liar. Gizzard feeders will have inedible things in their stomachs to break down food. Birds aren't tucking in to plastic cause they think it's food. Unfortunately Attenborough persistent lying has perculated ppl brains.

Intersting post. My views in co2 are known. The higher the better. It would be impossible to make co2 dangerously high.

Bizarre A1. Think someone doesn't like the plebs talking sense.