>
The first amazing thing about this report is that it comes from an official government Statistics Bureau in Scandinavia of all places. But then again, the Norwegians hate being lumped in with the conformist Swedes and socialist Danes.

You don't need to read Norwegian to get the report. The link below takes you to the official English translation:
“To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions?”
https://www.ssb.no/en/natur-og-miljo/forurensning-og-klima/artikler/to-what-extent-are-temperature-levels-changing-due-to-greenhouse-gas-emissions/_/attachment/inline/5a3f4a9b-3bc3-4988-9579-9fea82944264:f63064594b9225f9d7dc458b0b70a646baec3339/DP1007.pdf
Unlike the Michael Mann cabal, the authors of this paper and their specialist associates show all their workings in extensive appendices. Their statistics are immaculate, and their conclusions conservative. It''s the right stuff.

A very brief summary of conclusions is at
https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/10/a-new-report-throws-cold-water-on-man-made-global-warming-pseudoscience/
and a more measured piece, once the author overcomes his amazement at Scandinavians being so forward with the truth ("No Way, Norway!"), sets the perspective on this paper''s importance at
https://climatediscussionnexus.com/2023/10/04/no-way-norway/

For those too slack or too mathematically handicapped to read the short article, here's the executive summary:
"The results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be sufficiently strong to cause systematic changes in the pattern of the temperature fluctuations. In other words, our analysis indicates that with the current level of knowledge, it seems impossible to determine how much of the temperature increase is due to emissions of CO2.”

Enjoy!

Andre Jute
Funny how the hockey sticks disappear when you do honest statistics over relevant periods.
>

On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 11:13:30 PM UTC+1, Andre Jute wrote:
> >
> The first amazing thing about this report is that it comes from an official government Statistics Bureau in Scandinavia of all places. But then again, the Norwegians hate being lumped in with the conformist Swedes and socialist Danes.
>
> You don't need to read Norwegian to get the report. The link below takes you to the official English translation:
> “To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions?”
> https://www.ssb.no/en/natur-og-miljo/forurensning-og-klima/artikler/to-what-extent-are-temperature-levels-changing-due-to-greenhouse-gas-emissions/_/attachment/inline/5a3f4a9b-3bc3-4988-9579-9fea82944264:f63064594b9225f9d7dc458b0b70a646baec3339/DP1007.pdf
> Unlike the Michael Mann cabal, the authors of this paper and their specialist associates show all their workings in extensive appendices. Their statistics are immaculate, and their conclusions conservative. It''s the right stuff.
>
> A very brief summary of conclusions is at
> https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/10/a-new-report-throws-cold-water-on-man-made-global-warming-pseudoscience/
> and a more measured piece, once the author overcomes his amazement at Scandinavians being so forward with the truth ("No Way, Norway!"), sets the perspective on this paper''s importance at
> https://climatediscussionnexus.com/2023/10/04/no-way-norway/
>
> For those too slack or too mathematically handicapped to read the short article, here's the executive summary:
> "The results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be sufficiently strong to cause systematic changes in the pattern of the temperature fluctuations. In other words, our analysis indicates that with the current level of knowledge, it seems impossible to determine how much of the temperature increase is due to emissions of CO2.”
>
> Enjoy!
>
> Andre Jute
> Funny how the hockey sticks disappear when you do honest statistics over relevant periods.
> >
The comments below the article at
https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/10/a-new-report-throws-cold-water-on-man-made-global-warming-pseudoscience/
are knowledgeable and interesting. -- AJ
>

On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 3:23:37 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 11:13:30 PM UTC+1, Andre Jute wrote:
> > >
> > The first amazing thing about this report is that it comes from an official government Statistics Bureau in Scandinavia of all places. But then again, the Norwegians hate being lumped in with the conformist Swedes and socialist Danes.
> >
> > You don't need to read Norwegian to get the report. The link below takes you to the official English translation:
> > “To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions?”
> > https://www.ssb.no/en/natur-og-miljo/forurensning-og-klima/artikler/to-what-extent-are-temperature-levels-changing-due-to-greenhouse-gas-emissions/_/attachment/inline/5a3f4a9b-3bc3-4988-9579-9fea82944264:f63064594b9225f9d7dc458b0b70a646baec3339/DP1007.pdf
> > Unlike the Michael Mann cabal, the authors of this paper and their specialist associates show all their workings in extensive appendices. Their statistics are immaculate, and their conclusions conservative. It''s the right stuff.
> >
> > A very brief summary of conclusions is at
> > https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/10/a-new-report-throws-cold-water-on-man-made-global-warming-pseudoscience/
> > and a more measured piece, once the author overcomes his amazement at Scandinavians being so forward with the truth ("No Way, Norway!"), sets the perspective on this paper''s importance at
> > https://climatediscussionnexus.com/2023/10/04/no-way-norway/
> >
> > For those too slack or too mathematically handicapped to read the short article, here's the executive summary:
> > "The results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be sufficiently strong to cause systematic changes in the pattern of the temperature fluctuations. In other words, our analysis indicates that with the current level of knowledge, it seems impossible to determine how much of the temperature increase is due to emissions of CO2.”
> >
> > Enjoy!
> >
> > Andre Jute
> > Funny how the hockey sticks disappear when you do honest statistics over relevant periods.
> > >
> The comments below the article at
> https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/10/a-new-report-throws-cold-water-on-man-made-global-warming-pseudoscience/
> are knowledgeable and interesting. -- AJ
> >
Those comments are ALL subverted short term temperature histories that do not properly show any correct data from the little ice age or the huge high temperatures which were world wide in the dust bowl years.

I must also repeat that there is a significant problem using computer models developed by people looking for government grants rather than expanding scientific knowledge.

The areas of absorption of CO2 is on the far tail end of the spectrum emitted from the sun. There is so little energy at this point that it is just barely above the average temperature of the sea.

Because of the density of Earth's atmosphere, virtually 100% of the radiation absorbed at ground level is emitted via conduction and NOT radiation. CO2 therefore, has nothing to do with the temperatures in the atmosphere since the conduction of heat through atmospheric gases is virtually identical for all gases. Once the heated air reaches the upper stratosphere and the air is too thin to conduct properly the air molecules receive solar rations both directly from the sun and as reflection from the cloud layer. It is important to note that although radiation is non-directional, the level this occurs at is so high that most of it misses the earth. What's more, it has very little energy - it is not sunlight. It mostly just shows as a filter making the blue color in the sky.

Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?

<snip>
>
> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?

Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.

On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 9:46:01 AM UTC-7, Doug Landau wrote:
> <snip>
> >
> > Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.

I guess not., But then I designed and programmed liquid and gas chromatographs which taught me how to understand spectrometry.

On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 9:54:08 AM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 9:46:01 AM UTC-7, Doug Landau wrote:
> > <snip>
> > >
> > > Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> > Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> I guess not., But then I designed and programmed liquid and gas chromatographs which taught me how to understand spectrometry.

Well I used to program image display at Spectroscopy Imaging Systems(Varian/GE). Brain scans. So I already know what yer thinkin

On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 5:08:45 PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 3:23:37 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 11:13:30 PM UTC+1, Andre Jute wrote:
> > > >
> > > The first amazing thing about this report is that it comes from an official government Statistics Bureau in Scandinavia of all places. But then again, the Norwegians hate being lumped in with the conformist Swedes and socialist Danes.
> > >
> > > You don't need to read Norwegian to get the report. The link below takes you to the official English translation:
> > > “To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions?”
> > > https://www.ssb.no/en/natur-og-miljo/forurensning-og-klima/artikler/to-what-extent-are-temperature-levels-changing-due-to-greenhouse-gas-emissions/_/attachment/inline/5a3f4a9b-3bc3-4988-9579-9fea82944264:f63064594b9225f9d7dc458b0b70a646baec3339/DP1007.pdf
> > > Unlike the Michael Mann cabal, the authors of this paper and their specialist associates show all their workings in extensive appendices. Their statistics are immaculate, and their conclusions conservative. It''s the right stuff.
> > >
> > > A very brief summary of conclusions is at
> > > https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/10/a-new-report-throws-cold-water-on-man-made-global-warming-pseudoscience/
> > > and a more measured piece, once the author overcomes his amazement at Scandinavians being so forward with the truth ("No Way, Norway!"), sets the perspective on this paper''s importance at
> > > https://climatediscussionnexus.com/2023/10/04/no-way-norway/
> > >
> > > For those too slack or too mathematically handicapped to read the short article, here's the executive summary:
> > > "The results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be sufficiently strong to cause systematic changes in the pattern of the temperature fluctuations. In other words, our analysis indicates that with the current level of knowledge, it seems impossible to determine how much of the temperature increase is due to emissions of CO2.”
> > >
> > > Enjoy!
> > >
> > > Andre Jute
> > > Funny how the hockey sticks disappear when you do honest statistics over relevant periods.
> > > >
> > The comments below the article at
> > https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/10/a-new-report-throws-cold-water-on-man-made-global-warming-pseudoscience/
> > are knowledgeable and interesting. -- AJ
> > >
> Those comments are ALL subverted short term temperature histories that do not properly show any correct data from the little ice age or the huge high temperatures which were world wide in the dust bowl years.
>
> I must also repeat that there is a significant problem using computer models developed by people looking for government grants rather than expanding scientific knowledge.
>
> The areas of absorption of CO2 is on the far tail end of the spectrum emitted from the sun. There is so little energy at this point that it is just barely above the average temperature of the sea.
>
> Because of the density of Earth's atmosphere, virtually 100% of the radiation absorbed at ground level is emitted via conduction and NOT radiation. CO2 therefore, has nothing to do with the temperatures in the atmosphere since the conduction of heat through atmospheric gases is virtually identical for all gases. Once the heated air reaches the upper stratosphere and the air is too thin to conduct properly the air molecules receive solar rations both directly from the sun and as reflection from the cloud layer. It is important to note that although radiation is non-directional, the level this occurs at is so high that most of it misses the earth. What's more, it has very little energy - it is not sunlight. It mostly just shows as a filter making the blue color in the sky.
>
> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
>
The way I read the comments there, those posters were making satirical and sarcastic comments about the beliefs of the global warmies. Sorta like, "Yeahbut, whaddaya expect when you go back 420 thousand years? There weren't any people back then. So that proves that Global Warming is real! It was always there, as you can see in the many historic heat peaks from hundreds of thousands of years before the Industrial Revolution." If I said something as confused as that, you'd know I was ragging somone, because I wouldn't mean something as stupid as that (hell, that's almost down at the Krygowski-Flunky level of mindless dumbassery). Those guys commenting seem all to know each other, so there's space for a bit of humour. -- AJ
>

On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 5:46:01 PM UTC+1, Doug Landau wrote:
> <snip>
> >
> > Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
>
> Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
>
What's your problem, Doug? That's a scientific paper, not a "story made up".. Their workings are all there in appendices, the references check out, the statistics are sound (which is a hell of a lot more than you can say for the global warmie clowns like Michael Mann), and they were working with the official statistics, same as the global warmies -- but they weren't trying, as the global warmies did, to tell and protect a profitable lie. Or, in the words of Michael Mann, "Hide the decline."
>
Andre Jute
CO2 is tree food. Global warmies are serial forest-killers.
>

On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 10:52:43 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 5:08:45 PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 3:23:37 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > > On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 11:13:30 PM UTC+1, Andre Jute wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > The first amazing thing about this report is that it comes from an official government Statistics Bureau in Scandinavia of all places. But then again, the Norwegians hate being lumped in with the conformist Swedes and socialist Danes.
> > > >
> > > > You don't need to read Norwegian to get the report. The link below takes you to the official English translation:
> > > > “To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions?”
> > > > https://www.ssb.no/en/natur-og-miljo/forurensning-og-klima/artikler/to-what-extent-are-temperature-levels-changing-due-to-greenhouse-gas-emissions/_/attachment/inline/5a3f4a9b-3bc3-4988-9579-9fea82944264:f63064594b9225f9d7dc458b0b70a646baec3339/DP1007.pdf
> > > > Unlike the Michael Mann cabal, the authors of this paper and their specialist associates show all their workings in extensive appendices. Their statistics are immaculate, and their conclusions conservative. It''s the right stuff.
> > > >
> > > > A very brief summary of conclusions is at
> > > > https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/10/a-new-report-throws-cold-water-on-man-made-global-warming-pseudoscience/
> > > > and a more measured piece, once the author overcomes his amazement at Scandinavians being so forward with the truth ("No Way, Norway!"), sets the perspective on this paper''s importance at
> > > > https://climatediscussionnexus.com/2023/10/04/no-way-norway/
> > > >
> > > > For those too slack or too mathematically handicapped to read the short article, here's the executive summary:
> > > > "The results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be sufficiently strong to cause systematic changes in the pattern of the temperature fluctuations. In other words, our analysis indicates that with the current level of knowledge, it seems impossible to determine how much of the temperature increase is due to emissions of CO2.”
> > > >
> > > > Enjoy!
> > > >
> > > > Andre Jute
> > > > Funny how the hockey sticks disappear when you do honest statistics over relevant periods.
> > > > >
> > > The comments below the article at
> > > https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/10/a-new-report-throws-cold-water-on-man-made-global-warming-pseudoscience/
> > > are knowledgeable and interesting. -- AJ
> > > >
> > Those comments are ALL subverted short term temperature histories that do not properly show any correct data from the little ice age or the huge high temperatures which were world wide in the dust bowl years.
> >
> > I must also repeat that there is a significant problem using computer models developed by people looking for government grants rather than expanding scientific knowledge.
> >
> > The areas of absorption of CO2 is on the far tail end of the spectrum emitted from the sun. There is so little energy at this point that it is just barely above the average temperature of the sea.
> >
> > Because of the density of Earth's atmosphere, virtually 100% of the radiation absorbed at ground level is emitted via conduction and NOT radiation.. CO2 therefore, has nothing to do with the temperatures in the atmosphere since the conduction of heat through atmospheric gases is virtually identical for all gases. Once the heated air reaches the upper stratosphere and the air is too thin to conduct properly the air molecules receive solar rations both directly from the sun and as reflection from the cloud layer. It is important to note that although radiation is non-directional, the level this occurs at is so high that most of it misses the earth. What's more, it has very little energy - it is not sunlight. It mostly just shows as a filter making the blue color in the sky.
> >
> > Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> >
> The way I read the comments there, those posters were making satirical and sarcastic comments about the beliefs of the global warmies. Sorta like, "Yeahbut, whaddaya expect when you go back 420 thousand years? There weren't any people back then. So that proves that Global Warming is real! It was always there, as you can see in the many historic heat peaks from hundreds of thousands of years before the Industrial Revolution." If I said something as confused as that, you'd know I was ragging somone, because I wouldn't mean something as stupid as that (hell, that's almost down at the Krygowski-Flunky level of mindless dumbassery). Those guys commenting seem all to know each other, so there's space for a bit of humour. -- AJ
> >

There were plants growing at the time of the Ice Age. And they dropped leaves now and again that were encased in things that would save them well mummified. And there is a direct correlation between the amount of CO2 in the air and proportionality of stomata to leaf surface area. So the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is very well known from mining Peat Bogs and Tar Pits either of which can render not just CO2 levels but Geological time.

On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 11:04:27 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 5:46:01 PM UTC+1, Doug Landau wrote:
> > <snip>
> > >
> > > Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> >
> > Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> >
> What's your problem, Doug? That's a scientific paper, not a "story made up". Their workings are all there in appendices, the references check out, the statistics are sound (which is a hell of a lot more than you can say for the global warmie clowns like Michael Mann), and they were working with the official statistics, same as the global warmies -- but they weren't trying, as the global warmies did, to tell and protect a profitable lie. Or, in the words of Michael Mann, "Hide the decline."
> >
> Andre Jute
> CO2 is tree food. Global warmies are serial forest-killers.
> >

Doug is talking about MRS and MRSI or magnetic resonance spectroscopic brain imaging. While not the same thing as real Spectroscopy it can give you and idea of how it operates.

On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
<doug.landau@gmail.com> wrote:

><snip>
>>
>> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
>
>Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.

Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.

During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
more details
https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 9:04:31 PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 11:04:27 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 5:46:01 PM UTC+1, Doug Landau wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > >
> > > > Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> > >
> > > Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> > >
> > What's your problem, Doug? That's a scientific paper, not a "story made up". Their workings are all there in appendices, the references check out, the statistics are sound (which is a hell of a lot more than you can say for the global warmie clowns like Michael Mann), and they were working with the official statistics, same as the global warmies -- but they weren't trying, as the global warmies did, to tell and protect a profitable lie. Or, in the words of Michael Mann, "Hide the decline."
> > >
> > Andre Jute
> > CO2 is tree food. Global warmies are serial forest-killers.
> > >
> Doug is talking about MRS and MRSI or magnetic resonance spectroscopic brain imaging. While not the same thing as real Spectroscopy it can give you and idea of how it operates.
>
I've been meaning to discover the name of the sadist who designed those clanking machines for several years now. I would refuse to accept that he could be a cyclist, except I look at some of the clowns on RBT and it soon become apparent cycling has more than its fair share of bad pennies. -- AJ
>

On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41 AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
> <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ><snip>
> >>
> >> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> >
> >Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
>
> During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
> million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
> In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
> https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
> more details
> https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.
>
So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
>
Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
>
Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.

On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41 AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
> > <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > ><snip>
> > >>
> > >> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> > >
> > >Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> > Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
> >
> > During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
> > million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
> > In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
> > https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
> > more details
> > https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> >
> > John B.
> >
> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
> >
> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
> >
> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.

On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.

https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg

On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41 AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
> > <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > ><snip>
> > >>
> > >> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> > >
> > >Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> > Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
> >
> > During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
> > million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
> > In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
> > https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
> > more details
> > https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> >
> > John B.
> >
> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
> >
> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
> >
> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.

There's no viciousness there, only ignorance to a level that is hard for a person with a normal IQ to ascertain.

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 12:39:05 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
>
>https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg

Perhaps including a link to the source article, instead of just the
graph, would be more interesting:
<https://johnenglander.net/co2-levels-and-mass-extinction-events/>
"During past periods of abrupt change - the most recent one occurring
approximately 50 million years ago - it took roughly a million years
for CO2 to change by one hundred ppm. Thus it is now changing about
25,000 times faster than in known geologic history."

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 13:08:52 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 12:39:05 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
><cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
>>
>>https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
>
>Perhaps including a link to the source article, instead of just the
>graph, would be more interesting:
><https://johnenglander.net/co2-levels-and-mass-extinction-events/>
>"During past periods of abrupt change - the most recent one occurring
>approximately 50 million years ago - it took roughly a million years
>for CO2 to change by one hundred ppm. Thus it is now changing about
>25,000 times faster than in known geologic history."

Andre: Sorry about posting a comment in "your" thread. I didn't
notice this was "your" thread.

Ummm... how do I obtain your permission to post a comment to "your"
thread? Is email acceptable?

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 12:39:05 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41?AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
>> > On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
>> > <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > ><snip>
>> > >>
>> > >> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
>> > >
>> > >Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
>> > Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
>> >
>> > During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
>> > million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
>> > In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
>> > https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
>> > more details
>> > https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > John B.
>> >
>> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
>> >
>> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
>> >
>> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
>
>On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
>
>and

How strange. See
https://johnenglander.net/chart-of-temperature-and-co2-400000-years/
and
https://johnenglander.net/400000-year-graphic-shows-sea-level-temperature-and-co2/
How can ot be? That your reference varies so much from what John
apparently has said. Can it be? That you are lying again?

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 8:39:07 PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41 AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> > > On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
> > > <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > ><snip>
> > > >>
> > > >> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> > > >
> > > >Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> > > Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
> > >
> > > During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
> > > million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
> > > In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
> > > https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
> > > more details
> > > https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > John B.
> > >
> > So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
> > >
> > Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
> > >
> > Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
> On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
>
> https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
>
On a historic scale, as in that image, Climate Warming looks really pisswilly. These hacks who created the Global Warming scare story were particularly poorly educated, but even they knew the looking back only a few hundred years beyond the Industrial Revolution would show that man has nothing to do with CO2 levels. -- AJ
>

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 13:08:52 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 12:39:05 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
><cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
>>
>>https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
>
>Perhaps including a link to the source article, instead of just the
>graph, would be more interesting:
><https://johnenglander.net/co2-levels-and-mass-extinction-events/>
>"During past periods of abrupt change - the most recent one occurring
>approximately 50 million years ago - it took roughly a million years
>for CO2 to change by one hundred ppm. Thus it is now changing about
>25,000 times faster than in known geologic history."

But Jeff, posting the entire article would negate his argument, and
Tommy's (:-)

The accepted period of the Pleistocene epoch, which includes the "Ice
Age" is the period during which humans evolved.
https://www.livescience.com/40311-pleistocene-epoch.html
Even a casual look at the two fool's chart shows that this was a
period of decreasing CO2 levels.

And that current CO2 levels are well on the way to exceeding the
levels that existed during that period

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 4:13:06 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 8:39:07 PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > > On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41 AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
> > > > <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ><snip>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> > > > >
> > > > >Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> > > > Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
> > > >
> > > > During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
> > > > million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
> > > > In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range..
> > > > https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
> > > > more details
> > > > https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > John B.
> > > >
> > > So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
> > > >
> > > Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
> > > >
> > > Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
> > On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
> >
> > https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
> >
> On a historic scale, as in that image, Climate Warming looks really pisswilly. These hacks who created the Global Warming scare story were particularly poorly educated, but even they knew the looking back only a few hundred years beyond the Industrial Revolution would show that man has nothing to do with CO2 levels. -- AJ
> >
That's the entire point but morons are standing in line to claim the Michael Moore misinformation despite we the emails between n him and his crew deciding to counterfeit the records. What sort of ass doesn't have the ability to look that up?

On 10/24/2023 10:04 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 4:13:06 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 8:39:07 PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41 AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
>>>>> <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
>>>>> Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
>>>>>
>>>>> During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
>>>>> million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
>>>>> In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
>>>>> https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
>>>>> more details
>>>>> https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> John B.
>>>>>
>>>> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
>>>>>
>>>> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
>>>>>
>>>> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
>>> On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
>>>
>>> https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
>>>
>> On a historic scale, as in that image, Climate Warming looks really pisswilly. These hacks who created the Global Warming scare story were particularly poorly educated, but even they knew the looking back only a few hundred years beyond the Industrial Revolution would show that man has nothing to do with CO2 levels. -- AJ
>>>
> That's the entire point but morons are standing in line to claim the Michael Moore misinformation despite we the emails between n him and his crew deciding to counterfeit the records. What sort of ass doesn't have the ability to look that up?

Acolytes of the Global Warming religious sect will say, sure
Moore lied about the data because actual support for his
thesis cannot be found, but 'he speaks to a larger truth'
which means it's a lie.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 9:24:02 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 10/24/2023 10:04 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 4:13:06 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> >> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 8:39:07 PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> >>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41 AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
> >>>>> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
> >>>>> <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> <snip>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
> >>>>> Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
> >>>>> million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
> >>>>> In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range..
> >>>>> https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
> >>>>> more details
> >>>>> https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> John B.
> >>>>>
> >>>> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
> >>>>>
> >>>> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
> >>> On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
> >>>
> >> On a historic scale, as in that image, Climate Warming looks really pisswilly. These hacks who created the Global Warming scare story were particularly poorly educated, but even they knew the looking back only a few hundred years beyond the Industrial Revolution would show that man has nothing to do with CO2 levels. -- AJ
> >>>
> > That's the entire point but morons are standing in line to claim the Michael Moore misinformation despite we the emails between n him and his crew deciding to counterfeit the records. What sort of ass doesn't have the ability to look that up?
> Acolytes of the Global Warming religious sect will say, sure
> Moore lied about the data because actual support for his
> thesis cannot be found, but 'he speaks to a larger truth'
> which means it's a lie.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> a...@yellowjersey.org
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that the small rise in CO2 has done anything. But the same people that are presently protesting over at Stanford that the Israeli's are killing HAMAS when it was HAMAS that started it, are the same people that believe with religious fervor in global warming and open borders.

On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 10:47:13 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 9:24:02?AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 10/24/2023 10:04 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>> > On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 4:13:06?PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>> >> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 8:39:07?PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
>> >>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>> >>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41?AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
>> >>>>> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
>> >>>>> <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> <snip>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
>> >>>>> Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
>> >>>>> million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
>> >>>>> In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
>> >>>>> https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
>> >>>>> more details
>> >>>>> https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> Cheers,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> John B.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
>> >>> On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
>> >>>
>> >>> https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
>> >>>
>> >> On a historic scale, as in that image, Climate Warming looks really pisswilly. These hacks who created the Global Warming scare story were particularly poorly educated, but even they knew the looking back only a few hundred years beyond the Industrial Revolution would show that man has nothing to do with CO2 levels. -- AJ
>> >>>
>> > That's the entire point but morons are standing in line to claim the Michael Moore misinformation despite we the emails between n him and his crew deciding to counterfeit the records. What sort of ass doesn't have the ability to look that up?
>> Acolytes of the Global Warming religious sect will say, sure
>> Moore lied about the data because actual support for his
>> thesis cannot be found, but 'he speaks to a larger truth'
>> which means it's a lie.
>> --
>> Andrew Muzi
>> a...@yellowjersey.org
>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>
>There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that the small rise in CO2 has done anything. But the same people that are presently protesting over at Stanford that the Israeli's are killing HAMAS when it was HAMAS that started it, are the same people that believe with religious fervor in global warming and open borders.

But Tommy, the glaciers are getting smaller, the ocean levels are
rising, and perhaps it isn't CO2 levels. So tell us what is causing
it?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 11:23:58 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 10/24/2023 10:04 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 4:13:06?PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 8:39:07?PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 9:44:14?AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:12:41?AM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 09:45:59 -0700 (PDT), Doug Landau
>>>>>> <doug....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Over and over the question arises as to why ANYONE would be afraid of CO2 which is a fertilizer especially knowing that during the last full Ice Age that CO2 was more than 4 times what it is today?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tom. You are just not the kind of guy that that story was made up to tell to.
>>>>>> Poor old Tommy he's got it wrong yet again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> During ice ages CO2 levels were in the region of 200 parts per
>>>>>> million. Today the C02 level is in the neighborhood of 400 PPM.
>>>>>> In the inter glacier periods the CO2 level was in the 280 PPM range.
>>>>>> https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
>>>>>> more details
>>>>>> https://new.nsf.gov/news/scientists-solve-long-standing-mystery-why
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John B.
>>>>>>
>>>>> So what, Slow Johnny. Mr Kunich merely said there were some trees growing even in ice ages, with the implication from his text, which you missed altogether, that CO2 was always plant food. Averages over centuries, which is what you found in your undigested googblebug, detracts nothing from what Mr Kunich said.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Tell us, does you obsession with Mr Kunich really make you as vicious and stupid as you seem?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Unsigned so as not to encourage a posturing fool.
>>>> On a good day Slocomb ALMOST reaches the level of moron. The last Ice age started about 115,000 years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago The chart here shows the time of extinction events. These events were caused by Ice Ages and as you can see there were even Ice Ages with CO2 levels over 5,000 ppm. When you're a stupid driver of street sweepers it isn't particularly bright to think you have a clue about anything.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.johnenglander.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/CO2%20550my%20Extinction%20Chart%20from%20Ward.jpg
>>>>
>>> On a historic scale, as in that image, Climate Warming looks really pisswilly. These hacks who created the Global Warming scare story were particularly poorly educated, but even they knew the looking back only a few hundred years beyond the Industrial Revolution would show that man has nothing to do with CO2 levels. -- AJ
>>>>
>> That's the entire point but morons are standing in line to claim the Michael Moore misinformation despite we the emails between n him and his crew deciding to counterfeit the records. What sort of ass doesn't have the ability to look that up?
>
>Acolytes of the Global Warming religious sect will say, sure
>Moore lied about the data because actual support for his
>thesis cannot be found, but 'he speaks to a larger truth'
>which means it's a lie.

But disregarding all the hoorah about CO2, the glaciers are getting
smaller and the sea level is rising. What is causing it?
--
Cheers,

John B.