Home > Climate Change > >So who’s creating all of that dangerous carbon ‘pollution’?

>So who’s creating all of that dangerous carbon ‘pollution’?

>From the ever useful nooilforpacifists come the following graphs.

Annex B countries are those listed in the Kyoto Protocol as having to reduce their CO2 emissions. Non-Annexe B countries (such as India and China) do not have to reduce their emissions.


Well blow me down with a feather. The countries that have no emissions reduction target are doing more damage to the environment than the rest of us. Oh! The humanity!


China has made it past the US (as it did at the Olympics) and India has almost claimed 3rd place from Russia. Putin won’t be happy about that.

No wonder Australia’s so-called Climate Guru, Ross Garnaut, has been flip-flopping like an Obamafish on the matter of reductions in Australia that are not mirrored in the rest of the world.

And how’s that global temperature anomaly been going lately?


Hmmm, CO2 has been rising and the temperature has done nothing.

The reason is that CO2 is not the primary driver of climate but, shhhhhh, don’t tell the Climate Faithful. They’re a bit sensitive to pesky little things like facts.

(Nothing Follows)

Advertisements
Categories: Climate Change
  1. October 2, 2008 at 5:34 pm

    >The temperature has done nothing? Does your graph look like a flat line to you? Please answer this simple two-part question: a) Is the end of the UAH line higher or lower than the beginning? b) is the end of the HadCRUT line higher or lower than the beginning?

  2. October 2, 2008 at 6:32 pm

    >When it comes to the Insanity of “global warming” two facts stand out.1. Such Insanity is not a random event, but rather an act that is learned and taught by and to those willing to be intellectually corrupted.2. When given power, such Insanity expands at an exponential rate.

  3. October 2, 2008 at 10:54 pm

    >Dear Fudgie,Why isn’t the radical left that promotes the global warming scare intellectually honest on this one?You contend that CO2 is the primary driver of climate.CO2 has been rising linearly over time.Temperatures have not responded in such a way that would give any credence at all to CO2 being the primary driver.You people fail Science 101.

  4. October 3, 2008 at 5:50 pm

    >Fucky:CO2 has been rising linearly over time. – nope, more like exponentially.Temperatures have not responded in such a way that would give any credence at all to CO2 being the primary driver.Er, yes they have.If you want to talk about Science 101, I’m sure you can answer for us the two very simple questions that you conspicuously ignored. a) Is the end of the UAH line higher or lower than the beginning? b) is the end of the HadCRUT line higher or lower than the beginning?

  5. October 3, 2008 at 9:30 pm

    >Er, Fudgie,The point is the massive divergence between CO2 and temperature in the last 10 years.If UAH was around during the MWP or RWP then the graph would start at a point higher than the current temperature. Your lot are happy to use 1979 or the end of the LIA as a starting point but when 1998 is used you go nuts.It’s completely dishonest.

  6. October 3, 2008 at 10:36 pm

    >Fucky – those two questions were really simple. Can you not even bring yourself to answer them?What makes you think there has been any ‘massive divergence’ in the last ten years? What staggering lack of statistical understanding makes you think ‘climate’ is something that can even be measured over just ten years? From where do you derive your touching faith that some time in the past thousand years it has been hotter than it is today?

  7. October 4, 2008 at 12:57 am

    >Fudgie,You really are a dishonest person. I wonder whether you even realise it.Climate MUST be measured in THOUSANDS of years. Not ten, not tens, not centuries. Thousands.Somehow, the liars behind the fraud that is AGW seem to think that 30 years or 50 years or starting at the end of the coldest period in the last 500 years is OK.It’s not.Temperature change since 1998 is now outside the error bars of any of the models’ predictions, as I’m sure you’re well aware.Why is that?Because CO2 is not the primary driver of climate change, a point that you refuse to dispute.

  8. October 5, 2008 at 2:43 pm

    >No answer to those simple questions. Why not?And do you think perhaps there’s a contradiction in suggesting on the one hand that temperatures since 1998 prove something about climate change, while on the other saying climate change has to be measured over centuries and not anything less?Yet again you are just digging yourself ever deeper into a hole of stupidity.

  9. October 6, 2008 at 12:00 am

    >Er, Fudgie, you make my point for me!

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: