Dena, I do not think that co2 is the only component, however it is a component and a threshold has been reached. Asking which straw broke the camels back is beside the point. The camels back was broken, is that what you want?

If you don't measure the problem you could very well be trying to fix the wrong problem. This is worst than dong nothing because you waste resources that will be needed to correct the real problem. It's the story of the boy who cried wolf. If you don't get it right the first time, their may not be able to get your message out the next time. I suspect you are very young because age brings caution about getting the message right the first time. Don't open you mouth unless you are sure. It makes you look smarter. It's the one with the right answer and not the first who is respected.

---

Dena, I do not think that co2 is the only component, however it is a component and a threshold has been reached. Asking which straw broke the camels back is beside the point. The camels back was broken, is that what you want?

If you don't measure the problem you could very well be trying to fix the wrong problem. ...

And excess CO2 was measured to be the most significant of the problems.

You can't get any more direct than actually measuring the ions in the sea water. The wrong mix of ions and the water is corrosive to shell life and the shell life dies. That is happening in some areas, visibly.

So... What 'unarguable' 'evidence' are you looking for?

What high quality 'unarguable' 'evidence' can you provide?


Still our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Dena, I do not think that co2 is the only component, however it is a component and a threshold has been reached. Asking which straw broke the camels back is beside the point. The camels back was broken, is that what you want?

If you don't measure the problem you could very well be trying to fix the wrong problem. ...

And excess CO2 was measured to be the most significant of the problems.

You can't get any more direct than actually measuring the ions in the sea water. The wrong mix of ions and the water is corrosive to shell life and the shell life dies. That is happening in some areas, visibly.

So... What 'unarguable' 'evidence' are you looking for?

What high quality 'unarguable' 'evidence' can you provide?


Still our only one planet,
Martin

THEN WHY WASN'T IT IN THE PAPER????? That paper proves nothing by it's self other that the PH of the water is very low. The didn't bother to test for other factors, they just concluded that was the problem without explaining how they knew it. It draws conclusions from information that isn't contained in the paper and is an example of much of the warming argument. IT IS NOT GOOD SCIENCE.
You don't appear to have any chemical knowledge or an understanding of how to write a proof and should be careful about drawing conclusions on things you don't understand.

---

So... What 'unarguable' 'evidence' are you looking for?

What high quality 'unarguable' 'evidence' can you provide?

No one party yet has provided much in the way of evidence that has not been
open to a contrary argument against it. If there was unarguable evidence
then we would not be having these debates. As it stands, no one seems to
be budging on all this CO2 business, least you me nor the Queen of Sheba.
I suspect a turning point will be coming along very-very soon given us
all a pointer towards the right actions to be taking here.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Dena, your percepcion of me is way off. I graduated from University in 1968, I did not fall off the turnip truck yesterday.

---

Dena, your percepcion of me is way off. I graduated from University in 1968, I did not fall off the turnip truck yesterday.

You didn't say what in. i went for Electronic Engineering and a good deal of programming. This exposes you to all of the fields of science because you can't build something unless you understand what makes it work in the real world. This means Advanced math, Physics, Chemistry, Economics as well as classes relating to electronics. The funny part of it is I learned far more after I got out off school than while I was in it. School only starts you in the right direction and what you do in the real world greatly adds to it.
If you had any classes involving logical thinking you need to apply them to warming because the subject has many errors in it and you need to look for those errors in both arguments. Don't get the idea that because it's published it is correct. Your reputation not only depends on what you say but what you repeat.

It's ok to ask questions if you don't understand something. If you had provided that paper and ask what do you think of it I would have had very high respect for you. But instead you used it as evidence which indicates you were brain washed or you didn't understand what you were reading.

You have to understand how funding works today and this paper appears to be an example of it. The author wanted to write a paper about PH and current flow which is a worthwhile topic but couldn't get funding to do the research. But by changing the title from PH to a carbon related topic he was able to get all the money he wanted. Most people who get government funding understand this and the press couldn't read or understand the paper but got a good head line out of it. The government is happy because they have a paper that will aid them in getting more power and control over the public and the public doesn't know any better. The only ones who are not happy are the few honest scientist and people who question why this type of work is accepted as fact.

---

If you had any classes involving logical thinking you need to apply them to warming because the subject has many errors in it and you need to look for those errors in both arguments. Don't get the idea that because it's published it is correct. Your reputation not only depends on what you say but what you repeat.

Dena, what you have said here is so true, and what a state science is in
today over this CO2 issue...total disarray. A good enough reason why
we should not attack each other but only the data so supplied else we
fall into the same trap all these scientist have. None of us are fools
on this board though one suspects that there are many scientist's around
attempting to change all that..

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

... and what a state science is in today over this CO2 issue...total disarray. ...

Really?...

Please view: ... "The greatest deception in the history of science"...

And then comment further on that one.


Real or fantasy?


Still our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... and what a state science is in today over this CO2 issue...total disarray. ...

Really?...

Please view: ... "The greatest deception in the history of science"...

And then comment further on that one.


Real or fantasy?


Still our only one planet,
Martin

Entertaining and informative like all these climate change videos are.
Further down, on Youtube, where you obtained this video from is another
titled "Global Warming Hoax"...and so it goes on...where will it all end!
If you know the answer for sure then your a cleverer man than me Gunga Din.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

... and what a state science is in today over this CO2 issue...total disarray. ...

Really?...

Please view: ... "The greatest deception in the history of science"...

And then comment further on that one.


Real or fantasy?


Still our only one planet,
Martin

Entertaining and informative like all these climate change videos are.
Further down, on Youtube, where you obtained this video from is another
titled "Global Warming Hoax"...and so it goes on...where will it all end!
If you know the answer for sure then your a cleverer man than me Gunga Din.

And which do you believe is the more believable?

And why?

Still our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

And which do you believe is the more believable?

"Neither"

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

And which do you believe is the more believable?

"Neither"

Which leaves you believing what?...


Or is it that the sponsored FUD by the greatest polluters is very successful and very cost effective?


Still our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Which leaves you believing what?...

As I have stated in past posts, "The waters have been muddied by both sides"
Jones/Lindzen both have skeletons in their cupboard's. But clearly skeletons
don't amount to much here for one of them is still telling the truth though.

Dropping skeletons into the water just stirs up all the silt and hence muddies
the water yet again.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Which leaves you believing what?...

As I have stated in past posts, "The waters have been muddied by both sides"
Jones/Lindzen both have skeletons in their cupboard's. But clearly skeletons
don't amount to much here for one of them is still telling the truth though.

Dropping skeletons into the water just stirs up all the silt and hence muddies
the water yet again.

All the more reason to see what mud is being stirred and by who and for why... There is always a good story behind the dirt being thrown...

Meanwhile, the science remains the same and consistent and more than accurate enough to demonstrate world changing consequences.


Still our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

ML1, what I do not understand is the motivation of the deniers. Bad news does not get better with age.

That is one aspect I do not understand either.

• Is it just to be childishly mischievously contrary?
  
• Trolling for the sake of trolling?
  
• Genuine denial backed up by misplaced pride and embarrassment?
  
• Ignorance of the world and a frightened desperation for there to be no change?
  

Whatever, we do need a roadmap for a workable solution, and sooner rather than later. We also need to derail the selfish blind greed from those causing the worst of the pollution.

We are dependant on energy for our way of life. However, there are many options for how energy is converted. We have a choice of whether we pollute ourselves to death or not... Meanwhile, the science remains the same and consistent and more than accurate enough to demonstrate world changing consequences.


Still our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Going by this graph then It looks like death to the planet.

A current projection would make a good comparison enabling one
to see how effective World government applied CO2 controls have
been to date.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

I notice that you linked to a chart which had the US EIA as its data source. The EIA is a treasure-trove of information on this subject. I notice that the chart is a (mostly) future projection from 2005, therefore it does not include more recent data.

In the following link, I have collected a representative list of nations, and listed the 5 most recent available years (2005 - 2009).

http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfm?tid=90&pid=44&aid=8&cid=CH,FR,GM,IN,IT,RS,UK,US,&syid=2005&eyid=2009&unit=MMTCD

As you can see, the amount of CO2 emitted due to energy production fell in 3 of the 4 years 2006 - 2009 (compared to the previous year) in the USA, and fell in the European nations anywhere from 1 of the 4 years (France) to all 4 of the years (Italy).

In contrast, the 2 'developing' nations I listed (India and China) both had significant increases in CO2 emissions in all 4 of the years.

Also, in
http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfm?tid=90&pid=44&aid=8&cid=ww,&syid=2005&eyid=2009&unit=MMTCD
we see that the total world emissions fell only in 2009 compared to the previous year.

Furthermore, a very interesting chart is contained here:

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html

With the EIA as the data source.

It shows that not only is the USA not first in total CO2 emissions, China is, but also the USA is not first in per capita CO2 emissions. That 'honor' belongs to Australia by over 1 ton per person.

All this indicates that *IF* we need to restrict CO2 emissions, we need to include everyone on the planet in the restrictions with no exceptions. The Kyoto approach, exempting the 'developing' nations was a BAD idea. A surprising number of nations on that top 20 list are 'developing'.

In another 4 years or so, the 'developing' nations in just Asia (China, India, and a few others) will out-emit the entire group of 34 Nations in the OECD.

OECD Members:

Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, and the United States.

2015 projections:

Total OECD countries: 13031 million metric tons CO2.
Non-OECD Asia (China, India, and others): 13238 million metric tons CO2.

Source:
http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/tablebrowser/#release=IEO2011&subject=3-IEO2011&table=10-IEO2011&region=0-0&cases=Reference-0504a_1630

Yep, Nick, we are well and truly BONED if the Warmist's predictions are true.

---

https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.

First thoughts on this, "Are world governments going for CO2 redistribution
rather than world government reductions"? The result being that there will
be no intention of actually reducing overall CO2 output at all.
Future data will eventually answer this question and permit us to see
how genuinely concerned they all are, actions speak louder than words.

Now to have a look at your graphs, MajorKong. I obtained my graph via
a web search on "China and CO2". China does say that they intend to
reduce their CO2 output by 40% but not until around 2035 - 2040.
I'm not too sure if carbon fuels will still be in use by then?

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

The final data set of yours should show in time how effective western governments are at pegging or reducing CO2 output. Per Capita Emissions (Tons/Capita)
as production starts to increase in the west again, once this recession is over, this figure should ideally drop or at best stay static. At worst it will continue
to rise, now this would be an embarrassment.

Yep, Nick, we are well and truly BONED if the Warmist's predictions are true.

The answer MajorKong will be in the future data to come. If the slope of
the CO2 line stays positive, Governments are not worried. If the slope
goes down Governments were worried and this is then the results of their
combined actions.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

The final data set of yours should show in time how effective western governments are at pegging or reducing CO2 output. Per Capita Emissions (Tons/Capita)
as production starts to increase in the west again, once this recession is over, this figure should ideally drop or at best stay static. At worst it will continue
to rise, now this would be an embarrassment.

Yep, Nick, we are well and truly BONED if the Warmist's predictions are true.

The answer MajorKong will be in the future data to come. If the slope of
the CO2 line stays positive, Governments are not worried. If the slope
goes down Governments were worried and this is then the results of their
combined actions.

Mr. Kent said Canada could meet its commitment only through extreme measures, like pulling all motor vehicles from its roads and shutting heat off to every building in the country. He said the Liberal Party had agreed to the treaty “without any regard as to how it would be fulfilled.”

This is the thing that the Warmist's refuse to admit. To reduce the amount that they say is necessary, the extinction of humans is required. If you are calling for the extinction of Humans, extraordinary proof is required.

---