Why Are Republicans the Only Climate-Science-Denying Party in the World?

[charwin95]

So the climate is changing.
I thought the left didn't fear change ?

That's clever?

Do you think this is the first time in the planet's history that the climate has went through changes ?

Correct but we have more people, industries, cars, trucks etch. than ever before that produces lots of waste to our environment compared from the last climate change.

 

[Asclepias]

So the climate is changing.
I thought the left didn't fear change ?

That's clever?

Do you think this is the first time in the planet's history that the climate has went through changes ?

Correct but we have more people, industries, cars, trucks etch. than ever before that produces lots of waste to our environment compared from the last climate change.

It really defies belief that some people dont want to address that fact. Our carbon foot print was negligible the last time this happened but they want to pretend our current carbon footprint is the same.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

I dont understand the republican train of thought to just do nothing until we are in an event that could possibly wipe us out because they "dont believe it". Best case scenario is that we are not causing climate change. That doesnt mean we are not effecting it by pouring more Co2 into the atmosphere. Cons remind me of the people in the Dust Bowl times that didnt want to believe their farming habits were effecting the soil until it was too late.

Wasn't the progressive proclaimed apocalypse already supposed to have happened according to the prophet Al Gore?... Or has that now been postponed until next century?

*****CHUCKLE*****

I dont know. However werent we supposed to have flying cars by now as well? You miss the point. What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it? Will the fact that the estimate was off make you feel any better as you die?

I haven't missed any point at all...

I don't have a pressing need to worship the prophets of doom in some sort of atheistic rapture which demands I pay tribute to the gods of progressive liberalism or they will judge me prior to their apocalyptic event occurring as their followers who lack any scientific knowledge do when they listen to the progressive prophets of Ragnarok.

*****CHUCKLE******

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I dont understand the republican train of thought to just do nothing until we are in an event that could possibly wipe us out because they "dont believe it". Best case scenario is that we are not causing climate change. That doesnt mean we are not effecting it by pouring more Co2 into the atmosphere. Cons remind me of the people in the Dust Bowl times that didnt want to believe their farming habits were effecting the soil until it was too late.

Wasn't the progressive proclaimed apocalypse already supposed to have happened according to the prophet Al Gore?... Or has that now been postponed until next century?

*****CHUCKLE*****

I dont know. However werent we supposed to have flying cars by now as well? You miss the point. What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it? Will the fact that the estimate was off make you feel any better as you die?

What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it?

What if the skeptics are right and we waste $80 trillion on less reliable green energy to reduce temps in 2080 by 0.1 degrees?

 

[Asclepias]

I dont understand the republican train of thought to just do nothing until we are in an event that could possibly wipe us out because they "dont believe it". Best case scenario is that we are not causing climate change. That doesnt mean we are not effecting it by pouring more Co2 into the atmosphere. Cons remind me of the people in the Dust Bowl times that didnt want to believe their farming habits were effecting the soil until it was too late.

Wasn't the progressive proclaimed apocalypse already supposed to have happened according to the prophet Al Gore?... Or has that now been postponed until next century?

*****CHUCKLE*****

I dont know. However werent we supposed to have flying cars by now as well? You miss the point. What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it? Will the fact that the estimate was off make you feel any better as you die?

What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it?

What if the skeptics are right and we waste $80 trillion on less reliable green energy to reduce temps in 2080 by 0.1 degrees?

It would be no worse than the trillions we waste on other bullshit. If you are wrong you get to die. Does your position sound logical?

 

[Asclepias]

I dont understand the republican train of thought to just do nothing until we are in an event that could possibly wipe us out because they "dont believe it". Best case scenario is that we are not causing climate change. That doesnt mean we are not effecting it by pouring more Co2 into the atmosphere. Cons remind me of the people in the Dust Bowl times that didnt want to believe their farming habits were effecting the soil until it was too late.

Wasn't the progressive proclaimed apocalypse already supposed to have happened according to the prophet Al Gore?... Or has that now been postponed until next century?

*****CHUCKLE*****

I dont know. However werent we supposed to have flying cars by now as well? You miss the point. What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it? Will the fact that the estimate was off make you feel any better as you die?

I haven't missed any point at all...

I don't have a pressing need to worship the prophets of doom in some sort of atheistic rapture which demands I pay tribute to the gods of progressive liberalism or they will judge me prior to their apocalyptic event occurring as their followers who lack any scientific knowledge do when they listen to the progressive prophets of Ragnarok.

*****CHUCKLE******

So you admit you are just a simpleton parroting the words of your leaders?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I dont understand the republican train of thought to just do nothing until we are in an event that could possibly wipe us out because they "dont believe it". Best case scenario is that we are not causing climate change. That doesnt mean we are not effecting it by pouring more Co2 into the atmosphere. Cons remind me of the people in the Dust Bowl times that didnt want to believe their farming habits were effecting the soil until it was too late.

Wasn't the progressive proclaimed apocalypse already supposed to have happened according to the prophet Al Gore?... Or has that now been postponed until next century?

*****CHUCKLE*****

I dont know. However werent we supposed to have flying cars by now as well? You miss the point. What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it? Will the fact that the estimate was off make you feel any better as you die?

What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it?

What if the skeptics are right and we waste $80 trillion on less reliable green energy to reduce temps in 2080 by 0.1 degrees?

It would be no worse than the trillions we waste on other bullshit. If you are wrong you get to die. Does your position sound logical?

It would be no worse than the trillions we waste on other bullshit.

It would be worse.

Does your position sound logical?

Yes. Not wanting to waste $80 trillion on less reliable "green energy", for little or no benefit, sounds logical.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

I dont understand the republican train of thought to just do nothing until we are in an event that could possibly wipe us out because they "dont believe it". Best case scenario is that we are not causing climate change. That doesnt mean we are not effecting it by pouring more Co2 into the atmosphere. Cons remind me of the people in the Dust Bowl times that didnt want to believe their farming habits were effecting the soil until it was too late.

Wasn't the progressive proclaimed apocalypse already supposed to have happened according to the prophet Al Gore?... Or has that now been postponed until next century?

*****CHUCKLE*****

I dont know. However werent we supposed to have flying cars by now as well? You miss the point. What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it? Will the fact that the estimate was off make you feel any better as you die?

I haven't missed any point at all...

I don't have a pressing need to worship the prophets of doom in some sort of atheistic rapture which demands I pay tribute to the gods of progressive liberalism or they will judge me prior to their apocalyptic event occurring as their followers who lack any scientific knowledge do when they listen to the progressive prophets of Ragnarok.

*****CHUCKLE******

So you admit you are just a simpleton parroting the words of your leaders?

I believe my last post implied that you were the scientifically witless one.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[Asclepias]

I dont understand the republican train of thought to just do nothing until we are in an event that could possibly wipe us out because they "dont believe it". Best case scenario is that we are not causing climate change. That doesnt mean we are not effecting it by pouring more Co2 into the atmosphere. Cons remind me of the people in the Dust Bowl times that didnt want to believe their farming habits were effecting the soil until it was too late.

Wasn't the progressive proclaimed apocalypse already supposed to have happened according to the prophet Al Gore?... Or has that now been postponed until next century?

*****CHUCKLE*****

I dont know. However werent we supposed to have flying cars by now as well? You miss the point. What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it? Will the fact that the estimate was off make you feel any better as you die?

What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it?

What if the skeptics are right and we waste $80 trillion on less reliable green energy to reduce temps in 2080 by 0.1 degrees?

It would be no worse than the trillions we waste on other bullshit. If you are wrong you get to die. Does your position sound logical?

It would be no worse than the trillions we waste on other bullshit.

It would be worse.

Does your position sound logical?

Yes. Not wanting to waste $80 trillion on less reliable "green energy", for little or no benefit, sounds logical.

So If I read you correctly you think saving $80 trillion from being used on "green energy" is a smarter decision than possibly saving the world?

 

[Asclepias]

I dont understand the republican train of thought to just do nothing until we are in an event that could possibly wipe us out because they "dont believe it". Best case scenario is that we are not causing climate change. That doesnt mean we are not effecting it by pouring more Co2 into the atmosphere. Cons remind me of the people in the Dust Bowl times that didnt want to believe their farming habits were effecting the soil until it was too late.

Wasn't the progressive proclaimed apocalypse already supposed to have happened according to the prophet Al Gore?... Or has that now been postponed until next century?

*****CHUCKLE*****

I dont know. However werent we supposed to have flying cars by now as well? You miss the point. What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it? Will the fact that the estimate was off make you feel any better as you die?

I haven't missed any point at all...

I don't have a pressing need to worship the prophets of doom in some sort of atheistic rapture which demands I pay tribute to the gods of progressive liberalism or they will judge me prior to their apocalyptic event occurring as their followers who lack any scientific knowledge do when they listen to the progressive prophets of Ragnarok.

*****CHUCKLE******

So you admit you are just a simpleton parroting the words of your leaders?

View attachment 51182

I believe my last post implied that you were the scientifically witless one.

*****CHUCKLE*****

Your last post only assured me you are an idiot. Providing further proof only reinforces that conclusion.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Wasn't the progressive proclaimed apocalypse already supposed to have happened according to the prophet Al Gore?... Or has that now been postponed until next century?

*****CHUCKLE*****

I dont know. However werent we supposed to have flying cars by now as well? You miss the point. What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it? Will the fact that the estimate was off make you feel any better as you die?

I haven't missed any point at all...

I don't have a pressing need to worship the prophets of doom in some sort of atheistic rapture which demands I pay tribute to the gods of progressive liberalism or they will judge me prior to their apocalyptic event occurring as their followers who lack any scientific knowledge do when they listen to the progressive prophets of Ragnarok.

*****CHUCKLE******

So you admit you are just a simpleton parroting the words of your leaders?

View attachment 51182

I believe my last post implied that you were the scientifically witless one.

*****CHUCKLE*****

Your last post only assured me you are an idiot. Providing further proof only reinforces that conclusion.

Really????? Which one of us are singing the praises of the prophets of doom and worshiping their earthly presence with the hard earned dollars of all as tribute again as they follow them blindly with little knowledge of their own about science again?

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wasn't the progressive proclaimed apocalypse already supposed to have happened according to the prophet Al Gore?... Or has that now been postponed until next century?

*****CHUCKLE*****

I dont know. However werent we supposed to have flying cars by now as well? You miss the point. What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it? Will the fact that the estimate was off make you feel any better as you die?

What if you skeptics are wrong and could have done something about it?

What if the skeptics are right and we waste $80 trillion on less reliable green energy to reduce temps in 2080 by 0.1 degrees?

It would be no worse than the trillions we waste on other bullshit. If you are wrong you get to die. Does your position sound logical?

It would be no worse than the trillions we waste on other bullshit.

It would be worse.

Does your position sound logical?

Yes. Not wanting to waste $80 trillion on less reliable "green energy", for little or no benefit, sounds logical.

So If I read you correctly you think saving $80 trillion from being used on "green energy" is a smarter decision than possibly saving the world?

So If I read you correctly you think saving $80 trillion from being used on "green energy" is a smarter decision than possibly saving the world?

No. Wasting $80 trillion on "green energy" while not saving the world is worse than saving $80 trillion.

 

[flacaltenn]

I dont understand the republican train of thought to just do nothing until we are in an event that could possibly wipe us out because they "dont believe it". Best case scenario is that we are not causing climate change. That doesnt mean we are not effecting it by pouring more Co2 into the atmosphere. Cons remind me of the people in the Dust Bowl times that didnt want to believe their farming habits were effecting the soil until it was too late.

So many things to spend 6 or $8Trill on -- I guess you'd have to decide whether 1 or 2 degC by 2100 is a true enough crisis to hobble economies and cut-back discretionary spending. The ORIGINAL estimates were for 6 or even 8 degC by 2100 -- since revised way the hell down. In that sense -- skeptics have already prevailed.

And you better be DAMNED certain that 1 or 2 deg per century is TRUELY unprecedented in the record of climate history. Which honestly can't be assessed from what we ACTUALLY know since before the time of thermometers.

RIGHT NOW TODAY -- The US has kicked in some $30Bill into a GLOBAL redistribution scam to the poorer nations run by the UN. All with the premise that Global Warming has ALREADY harmed them. With Obama bucking for MUCH MORE --- that's gonna put a real crimp in the ability to support the needs of OUR debt-filled country to make all the other promises that leftists like for free stuff to the people of this country.

Since the tolerance has gotten smaller I would think its better to be safe than sorry. Debt is the way wealth/money works and you must be silly to think the debt is actually going to be addressed in any serious matter by anyone. If you had some power you would come up missing for voicing such an anti-capitalistic idea as getting rid of the debt. Trust and believe if we see a tipping point with climate change....debt is going the be last thing we will need to worry about.

Then do the things you WOULD have done for effects of warming world in 2200. Because even without the human contribution -- Ice will eventually melt and cause the seas to rise. At least until the next of series of 4 Ice Ages kicks in. We are on borrowed time for that event anyway. And another way to look at it on a climatic time scale -- is that we might be postponing the NEXT glacier advances for a couple hundred years. By 2100 -- we MIGHT actually be able to largely fossil fuels anyway.. Can't do that right now without hobbling ours and the world's economies.

Which is of course --- perfectly fine with the leftist vision of "de-industrializing" and slow growth anyway... That's why they are attracted to the proposition of making energy rare and expensive right now..

 

[Asclepias]

I dont understand the republican train of thought to just do nothing until we are in an event that could possibly wipe us out because they "dont believe it". Best case scenario is that we are not causing climate change. That doesnt mean we are not effecting it by pouring more Co2 into the atmosphere. Cons remind me of the people in the Dust Bowl times that didnt want to believe their farming habits were effecting the soil until it was too late.

So many things to spend 6 or $8Trill on -- I guess you'd have to decide whether 1 or 2 degC by 2100 is a true enough crisis to hobble economies and cut-back discretionary spending. The ORIGINAL estimates were for 6 or even 8 degC by 2100 -- since revised way the hell down. In that sense -- skeptics have already prevailed.

And you better be DAMNED certain that 1 or 2 deg per century is TRUELY unprecedented in the record of climate history. Which honestly can't be assessed from what we ACTUALLY know since before the time of thermometers.

RIGHT NOW TODAY -- The US has kicked in some $30Bill into a GLOBAL redistribution scam to the poorer nations run by the UN. All with the premise that Global Warming has ALREADY harmed them. With Obama bucking for MUCH MORE --- that's gonna put a real crimp in the ability to support the needs of OUR debt-filled country to make all the other promises that leftists like for free stuff to the people of this country.

Since the tolerance has gotten smaller I would think its better to be safe than sorry. Debt is the way wealth/money works and you must be silly to think the debt is actually going to be addressed in any serious matter by anyone. If you had some power you would come up missing for voicing such an anti-capitalistic idea as getting rid of the debt. Trust and believe if we see a tipping point with climate change....debt is going the be last thing we will need to worry about.

Then do the things you WOULD have done for effects of warming world in 2200. Because even without the human contribution -- Ice will eventually melt and cause the seas to rise. At least until the next of series of 4 Ice Ages kicks in. We are on borrowed time for that event anyway. And another way to look at it on a climatic time scale -- is that we might be postponing the NEXT glacier advances for a couple hundred years. By 2100 -- we MIGHT actually be able to largely fossil fuels anyway.. Can't do that right now without hobbling ours and the world's economies.

Which is of course --- perfectly fine with the leftist vision of "de-industrializing" and slow growth anyway... That's why they are attracted to the proposition of making energy rare and expensive right now..

Thats exactly what the wealthy oil tycoons want you to believe.

 

[flacaltenn]

So the climate is changing.
I thought the left didn't fear change ?

That's clever?

Do you think this is the first time in the planet's history that the climate has went through changes ?

Correct but we have more people, industries, cars, trucks etch. than ever before that produces lots of waste to our environment compared from the last climate change.

It really defies belief that some people dont want to address that fact. Our carbon foot print was negligible the last time this happened but they want to pretend our current carbon footprint is the same.

Thing about CO2 is that it's power wanes exponentially as the concentrations increase. Basic Physics without all the added "magical multipliers" in the GW theory says that you get about 1.1degC/ DOUBLING of the concentration. Pre-Industr. level was about 280ppm -- we're at 400 --- haven't even reached the 1st doubling since the Indust. Age began.. MIGHT reach that by 2040 or so.. THEN the next DOUBLING requires we get to 1120ppm which is TWICE the amount for the same 1.1Deg temp increase. That's not likely by 2100. Especially with technology advances.

So besides the imagined "magic multipliers" that GW theory used to predict 6 or 8degC by 2100 (since revised WAY down) ---- you also have the issue that GW science has SEVERELY overestimated the contributions from man to the observed warming. As witnessed by the lack of appreciable warming for the past 15 to 18 years.

IN FACT --- what we've observed and measured is a LOT closer to the 1.1degC/doubling from basic physics and chemistry -- and no where NEAR the initial hysterical predictions of doom that launched this clown circus of propaganda, fear and public misinformation...

 

[flacaltenn]

I dont understand the republican train of thought to just do nothing until we are in an event that could possibly wipe us out because they "dont believe it". Best case scenario is that we are not causing climate change. That doesnt mean we are not effecting it by pouring more Co2 into the atmosphere. Cons remind me of the people in the Dust Bowl times that didnt want to believe their farming habits were effecting the soil until it was too late.

So many things to spend 6 or $8Trill on -- I guess you'd have to decide whether 1 or 2 degC by 2100 is a true enough crisis to hobble economies and cut-back discretionary spending. The ORIGINAL estimates were for 6 or even 8 degC by 2100 -- since revised way the hell down. In that sense -- skeptics have already prevailed.

And you better be DAMNED certain that 1 or 2 deg per century is TRUELY unprecedented in the record of climate history. Which honestly can't be assessed from what we ACTUALLY know since before the time of thermometers.

RIGHT NOW TODAY -- The US has kicked in some $30Bill into a GLOBAL redistribution scam to the poorer nations run by the UN. All with the premise that Global Warming has ALREADY harmed them. With Obama bucking for MUCH MORE --- that's gonna put a real crimp in the ability to support the needs of OUR debt-filled country to make all the other promises that leftists like for free stuff to the people of this country.

Since the tolerance has gotten smaller I would think its better to be safe than sorry. Debt is the way wealth/money works and you must be silly to think the debt is actually going to be addressed in any serious matter by anyone. If you had some power you would come up missing for voicing such an anti-capitalistic idea as getting rid of the debt. Trust and believe if we see a tipping point with climate change....debt is going the be last thing we will need to worry about.

Then do the things you WOULD have done for effects of warming world in 2200. Because even without the human contribution -- Ice will eventually melt and cause the seas to rise. At least until the next of series of 4 Ice Ages kicks in. We are on borrowed time for that event anyway. And another way to look at it on a climatic time scale -- is that we might be postponing the NEXT glacier advances for a couple hundred years. By 2100 -- we MIGHT actually be able to largely fossil fuels anyway.. Can't do that right now without hobbling ours and the world's economies.

Which is of course --- perfectly fine with the leftist vision of "de-industrializing" and slow growth anyway... That's why they are attracted to the proposition of making energy rare and expensive right now..

Thats exactly what the wealthy oil tycoons want you to believe.

So I'm a tool for following the science and discussions and observing so much intentional propaganda and hype from the socio-political lobby and the media??

 

[Asclepias]

I dont understand the republican train of thought to just do nothing until we are in an event that could possibly wipe us out because they "dont believe it". Best case scenario is that we are not causing climate change. That doesnt mean we are not effecting it by pouring more Co2 into the atmosphere. Cons remind me of the people in the Dust Bowl times that didnt want to believe their farming habits were effecting the soil until it was too late.

So many things to spend 6 or $8Trill on -- I guess you'd have to decide whether 1 or 2 degC by 2100 is a true enough crisis to hobble economies and cut-back discretionary spending. The ORIGINAL estimates were for 6 or even 8 degC by 2100 -- since revised way the hell down. In that sense -- skeptics have already prevailed.

And you better be DAMNED certain that 1 or 2 deg per century is TRUELY unprecedented in the record of climate history. Which honestly can't be assessed from what we ACTUALLY know since before the time of thermometers.

RIGHT NOW TODAY -- The US has kicked in some $30Bill into a GLOBAL redistribution scam to the poorer nations run by the UN. All with the premise that Global Warming has ALREADY harmed them. With Obama bucking for MUCH MORE --- that's gonna put a real crimp in the ability to support the needs of OUR debt-filled country to make all the other promises that leftists like for free stuff to the people of this country.

Since the tolerance has gotten smaller I would think its better to be safe than sorry. Debt is the way wealth/money works and you must be silly to think the debt is actually going to be addressed in any serious matter by anyone. If you had some power you would come up missing for voicing such an anti-capitalistic idea as getting rid of the debt. Trust and believe if we see a tipping point with climate change....debt is going the be last thing we will need to worry about.

Then do the things you WOULD have done for effects of warming world in 2200. Because even without the human contribution -- Ice will eventually melt and cause the seas to rise. At least until the next of series of 4 Ice Ages kicks in. We are on borrowed time for that event anyway. And another way to look at it on a climatic time scale -- is that we might be postponing the NEXT glacier advances for a couple hundred years. By 2100 -- we MIGHT actually be able to largely fossil fuels anyway.. Can't do that right now without hobbling ours and the world's economies.

Which is of course --- perfectly fine with the leftist vision of "de-industrializing" and slow growth anyway... That's why they are attracted to the proposition of making energy rare and expensive right now..

Thats exactly what the wealthy oil tycoons want you to believe.

So I'm a tool for following the science and discussions and observing so much intentional propaganda and hype from the socio-political lobby and the media??

I didnt call you a tool. I implied you are naive.

 

[PredFan]

Uh.....uh, because they're stupid white people who's brain consist of concrete and gator spit. Uh, because they're bought and paid for with special interest money...uh, because they're from a country that can see Russia from its porch, hell I dunno!!

Because we are the only ones smart enough.

 

[Asclepias]

So the climate is changing.
I thought the left didn't fear change ?

That's clever?

Do you think this is the first time in the planet's history that the climate has went through changes ?

Correct but we have more people, industries, cars, trucks etch. than ever before that produces lots of waste to our environment compared from the last climate change.

It really defies belief that some people dont want to address that fact. Our carbon foot print was negligible the last time this happened but they want to pretend our current carbon footprint is the same.

Thing about CO2 is that it's power wanes exponentially as the concentrations increase. Basic Physics without all the added "magical multipliers" in the GW theory says that you get about 1.1degC/ DOUBLING of the concentration. Pre-Industr. level was about 280ppm -- we're at 400 --- haven't even reached the 1st doubling since the Indust. Age began.. MIGHT reach that by 2040 or so.. THEN the next DOUBLING requires we get to 1120ppm which is TWICE the amount for the same 1.1Deg temp increase. That's not likely by 2100. Especially with technology advances.

So besides the imagined "magic multipliers" that GW theory used to predict 6 or 8degC by 2100 (since revised WAY down) ---- you also have the issue that GW science has SEVERELY overestimated the contributions from man to the observed warming. As witnessed by the lack of appreciable warming for the past 15 to 18 years.

IN FACT --- what we've observed and measured is a LOT closer to the 1.1degC/doubling from basic physics and chemistry -- and no where NEAR the initial hysterical predictions of doom that launched this clown circus of propaganda, fear and public misinformation...

Youre repeating political propaganda instead of objectively thinking. Facts are the earth goes through climate change with or without human intervention. Something tips that off. Its a proven fact that the last climate change was due to excess CO2. Humans are adding plenty of CO2 in the air which may trigger another climate change. This is not a hard one to figure out.

 

[flacaltenn]

That's clever?

Do you think this is the first time in the planet's history that the climate has went through changes ?

Correct but we have more people, industries, cars, trucks etch. than ever before that produces lots of waste to our environment compared from the last climate change.

It really defies belief that some people dont want to address that fact. Our carbon foot print was negligible the last time this happened but they want to pretend our current carbon footprint is the same.

Thing about CO2 is that it's power wanes exponentially as the concentrations increase. Basic Physics without all the added "magical multipliers" in the GW theory says that you get about 1.1degC/ DOUBLING of the concentration. Pre-Industr. level was about 280ppm -- we're at 400 --- haven't even reached the 1st doubling since the Indust. Age began.. MIGHT reach that by 2040 or so.. THEN the next DOUBLING requires we get to 1120ppm which is TWICE the amount for the same 1.1Deg temp increase. That's not likely by 2100. Especially with technology advances.

So besides the imagined "magic multipliers" that GW theory used to predict 6 or 8degC by 2100 (since revised WAY down) ---- you also have the issue that GW science has SEVERELY overestimated the contributions from man to the observed warming. As witnessed by the lack of appreciable warming for the past 15 to 18 years.

IN FACT --- what we've observed and measured is a LOT closer to the 1.1degC/doubling from basic physics and chemistry -- and no where NEAR the initial hysterical predictions of doom that launched this clown circus of propaganda, fear and public misinformation...

Youre repeating political propaganda instead of objectively thinking. Facts are the earth goes through climate change with or without human intervention. Something tips that off. Its a proven fact that the last climate change was due to excess CO2. Humans are adding plenty of CO2 in the air which may trigger another climate change. This is not a hard one to figure out.

Who told you the last Ice Age was caused by EXCESS CO2?

Humans contribute about 5% of what Mother Nature emits in CO2 every year. And about 1/2 of that is CURRENTLY absorbed by plant life on the surface and by the oceans. That's the magnitude of your "excess" in the natural CO2 cycle.

We've had warming/cooling periods of 50 years or more several times since humans came to be. About every 1000 yrs. The Roman Warm Period, the Medieval Warm period, the Little Ice Age in the 1650s to 1750s .. NONE of that was due to CO2 emissions (although the cooling might have been EXTENDED by volcanic activity, it was not the cause.. The Maunder Minimum of the Sun extended the duration of the LIA)

C'mon man -- I don't read propaganda. I think and study the topic. Man emissions of CO2 MIGHT contribute about 1degC/ century to any LARGER and underlying natural cycles that ARE NOT being explored and properly considered.