Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tecoyah
There are available, vast reams of data concerning the ways in which CO2 plays into Global climate, and though I agree no one theory or hypothesis can explain the full effect, any truly logical interpretation of the information would show cumulative effect in play. Its all good and fine to get pissed off at the Hype Ustwo, I am as well (though for different reasons), but to use that as a reasoning for hiding ones head in the sand is almost as ignorant.
|
Of course CO2 plays a part in the climate. My first encounter with the global warming climate theory with CO2 playing a part was in the early 80's, it focused around why Venus was hotter than it should be based on its orbit. I've NEVER doubted CO2 plays a role, what I do deny is that human produced CO2 from the burning of fossil (and wood) fuels has had any measurable affect on the climate. Undoubtedly it plays a part, but its like blaming one French fry on why an obese person is fat. Sure it played a PART, but if they never saw that fry they would still be fat.
If the warming trend is inevitable, as will be our next ice age for that matter, I have to ask why anyone would make to make token, but expensive gestures that do nothing but lower the quality of life of humans across the globe.
Interestingly the best hydrocarbon fuel engine at 100% efficiency produces only CO2 and water as 'waste'. This would be a wonderful achievement and in fact we are getting close to this at a practical level. Instead we are labing CO2 as a pollutant which is just insane.
All global warming advocates have are 'computer models' in their favor so to speak. Well those same models can't 'predict' the global cooling of the 70's can't recreate any past climates, yet we are suppose to trust them as a crystal ball for the future?
Pardon me for doubting.