www.co2science.org/edit/v7/v7n38edit.htm

Quoted: www.co2science.org/edit/v7/v7n38edit.htm

Good one, some real science.

Good read, VT, and pretty much what I've been reading about and hearing about for years now. Thanks.

The two most overblown "scientific findings" in the last 20 years:

Second-hand smoke and global warming.

Global warming isn't, and you get no more exposure to carcinogens, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, etc, from second-hand smoke than you do standing on the corner of a busy street in a large city. Even worse during rush hour.

While all of the "scientists" that are quoted on the news about global warming always state that it's caused by people and cars, they incessantly gloss over the FACT that global warming is actually caused by THE SUN!!

Take this test, and know the truth, once and for all.

www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html

Quote from
www.co2science.org/edit/v7/v7n38edit.htm

In light of these similar independent experimental observations, it would appear that worn-out climate-alarmist claims to the contrary are simply just that: worn-out claims that have no backing in empirical science.  Both the aerial fertilization effect of atmospheric CO2 enrichment and the soil fertilization effect of the increase in nitrogen mineralization induced by global warming have a tendency to increase carbon sequestration in forest ecosystems, thereby providing a strong, double-barreled, negative-feedback brake on the impetus for warming created by the enhanced greenhouse effect of the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content.  The threats to nature that climate alarmists see in these global changes (rising atmospheric CO2 concentration and temperature) are in reality blessings in thinly-veiled disguise that truly give power to the biosphere.

The storage of CO2 by biota is not long-term sequestration.  The leaves die and return the carbon to the cycle.  Carbon stays locked up when the LONG-TERM rate of sequestration exceeds the rate of release.

All of this is likely true, but it does not address the OBSERVATIONS.  That global temperatures are increasing.    The big Question is: what is the anthropomorphic contribution? 5% or 50%.

The Kyoto protocol was stupid, nothing we do now will have any effect on the trend for decades.  More feel-good socialist crap.   And since the % contribution from man is not known to any degree of certainty, we don't know how many SUVs need to be sacrificed.

Quoted: Good read, VT, and pretty much what I've been reading about and hearing about for years now. Thanks. The two most overblown "scientific findings" in the last 20 years: Second-hand smoke and global warming. Global warming isn't, and you get no more exposure to carcinogens, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, etc, from second-hand smoke than you do standing on the corner of a busy street in a large city. Even worse during rush hour.

Don’t forget “Acid Rain” the lie that died a long lingering death.

Assuming global warming might be real humans are not effecting it one way or another.