You alarmists talk about big oil and the kootch brothers throwing money into the denial camp.

Well it seems the alarmists have banks on there side.

Any way big oil is on board climate change and the forming of a $2 trillion dollar carbon credit market per annum.

They actually want it......!!!!

A new market that taxes the air we breath while the oligarcgy get filthy rich.

BTW when this market forms it will bite all you goody two shoes environmental foot soldiers right on the butt.

Once it has formed the only thing that will matter is the health of this market and its sustainability.

There not going to reduce CO2 cause they know it has no effect on Earth's temperature.

Their going to increase to keep the market healthy.


Quote:

Bank of America to Invest $50 Billion to Address Climate Change Bank of America has announced it will direct $50 billion to address climate change over the next ten years, but it was slammed by an NGO for not addressing its financing of coal businesses. The bank’s new goal will be effective from 2013, as its previous $20 billion target, set in 2007, will be met by the end of this year, four years early. Its environmental business initiative will consist primarily of lending, equipment finance, capital markets, advisory services, carbon finance, and advice and investment solutions for clients. The areas of focus include energy efficiency, renewable energy and infrastructure, low-carbon transportation and water and waste. The bank also announced a goal to provide $100 million in grants and programme-related investments to non-profit organisations, community development financial institutions and other NGOs involved with low-carbon technologies and forestry. But the bank did not address its role in financing fossil fuels, said San Francisco-based NGO Rainforest Action Network (RAN), which added that its financing initiative for renewables is not enough to reduce emissions and protect the planet. “Bank of America’s commitment to renewable energy is a step in the right direction. However, the bank is simultaneously taking two steps back by continuing to underwrite the coal industry,” said Amanda Starbuck, director of RAN’s energy and finance programme. http://oilprice.com/The-Environment/Global-Warming/Bank-of-America-to-Invest-50-Billion-to-Address-Climate-Change.html

The World Bank is immersed in Climate change....!!!!

Wonder why boys and girls....???????

BTW the world bank owns the United nations which in turn own the IPCC.

http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/climatechange/overview

http://i61.tinypic.com/9rm6b6.jpg

Quote:

Banks and trading houses bought two-thirds of carbon permits During the northern winter, there were more speculators in the carbon market than genuine players. Those bankers must be very concerned about the environment. Speculators main buyers in EU carbon auctions -report 17 May 2013 LONDON, May 17 (Reuters Point Carbon) – Banks and trading houses bought more than two thirds of the 138 million carbon permits sold by 25 European governments between Nov. 2012 and Feb. 2013 to help power plants and factories comply with the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, an EU Commission report published Friday showed. Six “credit institutions” and six “investment firms” dominated the 35 auctions held over that period, picking up as much as 80 percent of the allowances sold in January alone, the report said, adding that only one of those companies was eligible to bid on behalf of clients. http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2378205 paywalled. Things have changed in the carbon market. From 2005-2012 most allowances were given away free, but now they are being sold at auction. So the period starting Nov 2012 was probably the first sales under the new system. It is expected that the bankers and traders will sell the permits to the power companies in the futures market. read the rest here http://joannenova.com.au/2013/05/banks-and-trading-houses-bought-two-thirds-of-carbon-permits/

interesting response on the cost...!!!!



Quote:

Andrew McRae May 28, 2013 at 3:03 pm I was just watching Parliament house live. (Very infuriating, brace yourselves.) The prime minister said that “carbon pollution” was causing climate change, the science says so, and “no person of reason could possibly disagree”. (!) At this point I believe the honourable Member for Tangey was ordered to leave the chamber for interjecting. I shouted my approval at the television, “Good on ya Dennis Jensen!!” as Dr Jensen took one last disgusted look at the chamber before closing the door behind him. The government then gave the opposition leader a “chance” to answer the question of “whether he believes in anthropogenic climate change” and is he still committed to a 5% reduction in carbon emissions by 2020. Obviously this was intended to highlight Abbot is also an adherent of the new religion and that there was still bipartisan agreement to a reduction target, so anything Abbot whinges about will ultimately have no substantial basis or lead to no significant change in outcome. Tony Abbot’s reply (and you can look up the exact quote from Hansard probably within an hour) was basically along the lines of: “ A) We accept the science that tells us that “something is happening to our planet“. B) But our Direct Action plan on more trees, improved soils, and better technology will actually achieve domestic “carbon” emissions reductions when the government’s Great Big New Crippling Carbon Tax will not. C) Domestic “carbon” emissions were projected to rise even under a $37/tonne price. The only way the government is reaching a 5% reduction target is by buying 100 million tonnes of emissions from overseas carbon traders. This tax is a 3.5 billion dollar gift to the foreign carbon traders, paid for by everybody in Australia. I found this final admission of a nugget of truth in a house of lip-service and deceit quite surprising. The fact the carbon tax is a gift to the banksters and the UN has been a poorly kept secret for over a year and based on the comments I just saw in Parliament it is totally out in the open now. http://joannenova.com.au/2013/05/banks-and-trading-houses-bought-two-thirds-of-carbon-permits/

Do you honestly think anyone would try cutting their emissions with hand outs like this....?????


Quote:

Generators have received $1 billion in government compensation money in the six months since the carbon price has been in place, the report prepared for lobby group Environment Victoria says. The report estimates generators will receive between $2.3 billion and $5.4 billion, depending on the future carbon price, unless the compensation system is reviewed. http://www.9news.com.au/national/2013/02/20/01/00/power-stations-reap-carbon-windfall-study

Gillard should be in jail.......!!!!!


Quote:

"International carbon markets will cover billions of consumers this decade. Ask the bankers at your table whether they want Australia to clip that ticket. We’re going to help them get their share." Julia Gillard

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xv3OLKsQ83k

Quote:

Former VP Al Gore, co-founder and president of Generation Investment Management, a carbon emissions trading company poised to make billions if cap and trade ever becomes mandatory, hawked his Global Warming re-branded as Climate Change 24 Hours of "Reality"last week to little notice. Meanwhile, UN worldcrats are drooling over the Green Climate Fund in which "the world's richest countries [places where political leaders financially rape productive citizens via ever-burgeoning taxes] pledged to channel $100 billion annually by 2020, part of it through the fund, to help poorer nations [places where leaders have already taxed their populations into abject destitution] reduce greenhouse-gas emissions" [while skimming as much Other People's Money as possible into their own secret bank accounts]. http://www.examiner.com/article/climate-change-the-scam-that-just-won-t-die

Quote:

Corporations try to hijack green climate fund at Durban Sunday, December 4, 2011 The World Bank Out of Climate Finance coalition issued the statement below on December 1 from Durban, South Africa. * * * Today, 163 civil society organisations from 39 countries released a letter exposing an attempt led by the US, Britain and Japan to turn the Green Climate Fund into a “Greedy Corporate Fund” at UN climate talks in South Africa. The Green Climate Fund was created to support people in developing countries — people who are the most affected by the climate crisis but are the least responsible for it. But at the climate negotiations this week, developed countries are trying to allow multinational corporations and financiers to directly access Green Climate Fund financing. This means companies could bypass developing country governments and their national climate strategies to get to public money. “Turning the Green Climate Fund into a Greedy Corporate Fund would be shameful, yet this is what is being attempted at the Durban climate talks,” said Meena Raman from Third World Network. Karen Orenstein from Friends of the Earth US said: “Led by the US and the UK on behalf of Wall Street and The City, this attempt to hijack developing countries’ funding is outrageous. “Communities need this money to address climate change and to finance their own development — without repeating the same mistakes that the rich countries have made.” Lidy Nacpil of Jubilee South Asia/Pacific Movement on Debt and Development said: “The role of private investment in financing climate activities must be decided at the national and sub-national levels in line with countries’ priorities, not corporate bottom lines. “The move to allow the private sector to go directly to the Green Climate Fund for money undermines the possibility of a democratic, participatory process for meeting the needs of communities struggling to fight climate change.” Few adaptation measures in developing countries will be attractive to the private sector, as they will not generate revenue. Some key mitigation programs may also not be financially lucrative. Groups also warned against closed-door negotiations on the Green Climate Fund by South Africa, the US and other developed countries. Bobby Peek of groundwork/Friends of the Earth South Africa said: “Whatever happens in Durban must be fully transparent. We are deeply concerned by reports that South Africa is informally consulting behind closed doors on the Green Climate Fund decision. “This will greatly undermine the legitimacy, and ultimately the effectiveness, of the Green Climate Fund.” The concerns expressed in the letter come on top of the long-held rejection by many in civil society of any role for the World Bank in the Green Climate Fund. http://aussiepolitics.proboards.com/thread/367/good-carbon-tax

Just in case any of you dont know.........................................

Credit default swaps (CDS) are the primary reason why we had the Global Financial Crises (GFC) in 2008 and why most countries around the world today find themselves slaves to BANKERS.

Its not the countries that are in trouble its their PRIVATE banks that due to their greed and misuse of funds have enslaved the tax payers and citizens of all nations to bow down to bankers by handing over the riches of their land.

The woman that invented (CDS) is also the same architect for Carbon Derivatives.

Now what does that tell you about the carbon tax ETS and the relationship to bankers.

All the FOOLS that think the carbon tax/ETS will some how clean up manmade pollution you better reassess what is happening to you and your country.

Because you're been taken for a ride.

Some of you gullable fools say its better to do something than nothing.

Well the carbon tax ETS will do NOTHING to clean up manmade pollution.



Quote:

Woman Who Invented Credit Default Swaps is One of the Key Architects of Carbon Derivatives, Which Would Be at the Very CENTER of Cap and Trade As I have previously shown, speculative derivatives (especially credit default swaps or CDS are a primary cause of the economic crisis. They were largely responsible for bringing down Bear Stearns, AIG (and see this), WaMu and other mammoth corporations. According to top experts, risky derivatives were not only largely responsible for bringing down the American (and world) economy, but they still pose a substantial systemic risk: A Nobel prize-winning economist (George Akerlof) predicted in 1993 that CDS would cause the next meltdown Warren Buffett called them weapons of mass destruction in 2003 Warren Buffett¡¯s sidekick Charles T. Munger, has called the CDS prohibition the best solution, and said ¡°it isn¡¯t as though the economic world didn¡¯t function quite well without it, and it isn¡¯t as though what has happened has been so wonderfully desirable that we should logically want more of it¡± Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan ¨C after being one of their biggest cheerleaders ¨C now says CDS are dangerous Former SEC chairman Christopher Cox said ¡°The virtually unregulated over-the-counter market in credit-default swaps has played a significant role in the credit crisis¡± Newsweek called CDS ¡°The Monster that Ate Wall Street¡± President Obama said in a June 17 speech on his plans for finance industry regulatory reform that credit swaps and other derivatives ¡°have threatened the entire financial system¡± George Soros says the market is still unsafe, and that credit- default swaps are ¡°toxic¡± and ¡°a very dangerous derivative¡± because it¡¯s easier and potentially more profitable for investors to bet against companies using them than through so-called short sales. U.S. Congresswoman Maxine Waters introduced a bill in July that tried to ban credit-default swaps because she said they permitted speculation responsible for bringing the financial system to its knees. Nobel prize-winning economist Myron Scholes ¨C who developed much of the pricing structure used in CDS ¨C said that over-the-counter CDS are so dangerous that they should be ¡°blown up or burned¡±, and we should start fresh A leading credit default swap expert (Satyajit Das) says that the new credit default swap regulations not only won¡¯t help stabilize the economy, they might actually help to destabilize it. Senator Cantwell says that the new derivatives legislation is weaker than current regulation Round Two: Carbon Derivatives Now, Bloomberg notes that the carbon trading scheme will be largely centered around derivatives: The banks are preparing to do with carbon what they¡¯ve done before: design and market derivatives contracts that will help client companies hedge their price risk over the long term. They¡¯re also ready to sell carbon-related financial products to outside investors. [Blythe] Masters says banks must be allowed to lead the way if a mandatory carbon-trading system is going to help save the planet at the lowest possible cost. And derivatives related to carbon must be part of the mix, she says. Derivatives are securities whose value is derived from the value of an underlying commodity ¡ª in this case, CO2 and other greenhouse gases¡­ Who is Blythe Masters? She is the JP Morgan employee who invented credit default swaps, and is now heading JPM¡¯s carbon trading efforts. As Bloomberg notes (this and all remaining quotes are from the above-linked Bloomberg article): read the rest here www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/12/woman-who-invented-credit-default-swaps-is-one-of-the-key-architects-of-carbon-derivatives-which-would-be-at-the-very-center-of-cap-and-trade.html From the same site:....................... Financial experts are also opposed to cap and trade: Even George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund operator, says money managers would find ways to manipulate cap-and-trade markets. ¡°The system can be gamed,¡± Soros, 79, remarked at a London School of Economics seminar in July. ¡°That¡¯s why financial types like me like it ¡ª because there are financial opportunities¡±¡­ Hedge fund manager Michael Masters, founder of Masters Capital Management LLC, based in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands [and unrelated to Blythe Masters] says speculators will end up controlling U.S. carbon prices

Who said CO2 was harmless, its caused the world to go completely mad  :D

Hey hairy arse chimp, here's something for you to ponder over banana breath, its abit out dated but its still close enough.


Quote:

Known Data From thermodynamics (ideal gas) One mol at one atmosphere (101.3 Kpa) @25° C = 24.465L/mol @0° C = 22.414L/mol From the periodic table (Molar mass number) Carbon (C) = 12.011g mol-1 Oxygen (O) = 15.999g mol-1 use 16g mol-1 Therefore the molar mass of CO2 is CO2 = 12.011 + (2x16) = 42.011g mol-1 From Wikipedia Current concentrations of CO2 in our atmosphere are at 0.039% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Calculations to find the total volume of CO2 in one cubic metre of air Now one cubic metre of air is equal to one thousand litres (1000L). Where L = Litres Therefore the total volume in Litres (L) of CO2 in one cubic metre (1000L) of air is 1000 x 0.00039 = 0.39 L (Total volume of CO2 in one cubic metre of air) 97% CO2 comes from the ecosystems = 97% of 0.39 = 0.3783 L _ (378.3 milliliters natural CO2) 3% CO2 comes from man = 3% of 0.39 = 0.0117 L _ (11.7 millilitres manmade CO2) Australia’s emissions are (1.5% of all manmade CO2) within that one cubic metre (1000L) of air our contribution of CO2 volume is 1.5% x 11.7 = 0.1755 millilitres that’s not even one millilitre 2. Calculations to find the total mass of CO2 in one cubic metre of air The formula to find the mass of CO2 in one cubic metre (1000L) of air is, m = n x M Where m = mass in grams n = moles M = molar mass Therefore one mole of CO2 = 0.39/24.465 = 0.01594 And the total mass of CO2 contained in one cubic metre (1000L) of air is m = n x m m = 0.01594 x 42 m = 0.6695 grams that's not even one gram 97% CO2 comes from the ecosystems = 97% of 0.6695 = 0.649415 grams (natural) 3% CO2 comes from man = 3% of 0.6695 = 0.020085 grams (manmade) Australia’s emissions are (1.5% of all manmade CO2) within that one cubic metre (1000L) of air our contribution of CO2 mass is 1.5% x 0.020085 = 0.000301275 grams that’s way below one gram.

Batman trolling himself now...

I wonder if the capped crusader knows how much TAX PAYERS money is funnelled into the fossil fuel industry? How much do Banks fund the fossil fuel industry? How many wars are fought over fossil fuels directly and indirectly?

Poor poor Batman, he is concerned about a few billion going in renewable resources. An investment that will help the children.

We all know what Batman thinks about the long wellbeing of children don't we ladies and gentlemen?

http://theesposure.com/DAMMnation/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/smoking_monkey.gif

Chimp_Logic wrote on May 30^th, 2015 at 2:45pm:

Batman trolling himself now... I wonder if the capped crusader knows how much TAX PAYERS money is funnelled into the fossil fuel industry? How much do Banks fund the fossil fuel industry? How many wars are fought over fossil fuels directly and indirectly? Poor poor Batman, he is concerned about a few billion going in renewable resources. An investment that will help the children. We all know what Batman thinks about the long wellbeing of children don't we ladies and gentlemen? http://theesposure.com/DAMMnation/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/smoking_monkey.gif

Lost for words again are we red arse, is that why your playing the children hand again....????

Batcrap talking to himself now, frothing at the mouth because people can see through his cut and paste fossil web spin.

You need to apologise to everyone on this forum

Chimp_Logic wrote on May 30^th, 2015 at 4:17pm:

Batcrap talking to himself now, frothing at the mouth because people can see through his cut a paste fossil web spin. You need to apologise to everyone on this forum

What don't you mean you have to apologise for deceiving everyone with your alarmists religious ways.+

Ajax wrote on May 30^th, 2015 at 4:20pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on May 30th, 2015 at 4:17pm: Batcrap talking to himself now, frothing at the mouth because people can see through his cut a paste fossil web spin. You need to apologise to everyone on this forum What don't you mean you have to apologise for deceiving everyone with your alarmists religious ways.+

Are english is you're first languigge?

Have you got any more crack pot lists with surnames and a year next them?

;D :D ;D ;) ;D :D

Chimp_Logic wrote on May 30^th, 2015 at 4:24pm:

Ajax wrote on May 30th, 2015 at 4:20pm: Chimp_Logic wrote on May 30th, 2015 at 4:17pm: Batcrap talking to himself now, frothing at the mouth because people can see through his cut a paste fossil web spin. You need to apologise to everyone on this forum What don't you mean you have to apologise for deceiving everyone with your alarmists religious ways.+ Are english is you're first languigge? Have you got any more crack pot lists with surnames and a year next them? ;D :D ;D ;) ;D :D

Hey worm breath like all AGW religious zealots when you haven't got a scientific foot to stand on you resort to personal attacks and name calling.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cdmqn9JIuzc

Ajax's notion of science is copying and pasting surnames from fossil fuel crack pot sites....

What's wrong with the peer reviewed scientific literature Batcrap?

Poor poor Batcrap

His lies have been exposed again and now he is frothing at the mouth and throwing a maggot freak tantrum.

Chimp_Logic wrote on May 30^th, 2015 at 4:49pm:

Ajax's notion of science is copying and pasting surnames from fossil fuel crack pot sites.... What's wrong with the peer reviewed scientific literature Batcrap? Poor poor Batcrap His lies have been exposed again and now he is frothing at the mouth and throwing a maggot freak tantrum.

typical chimp poo.... ::)

Anthrax struggling with basic high school level scientific principles ladies and gentlemen.

The Great Batcrap and his deranged lists of names who have clearly not given their consent to be misrepresented in public.

The crapped Crusader exposed again as a copy-paste clown who works in the coal circus with the rest of the Dr Sircuses and Easterbrook bunnies. batcrap even quotes the lunatic Aussie Salby - the king of ignorance

http://www.kongtechnology.com/images/geek-monkey.jpg

Chimp_Logic wrote on May 30^th, 2015 at 7:03pm:

Anthrax struggling with basic high school level scientific principles ladies and gentlemen. The Great Batcrap and his deranged lists of names who have clearly not given their consent to be misrepresented in public. The crapped Crusader exposed again as a copy-paste clown who works in the coal circus with the rest of the Dr Sircuses and Easterbrook bunnies. batcrap even quotes the lunatic Aussie Salby - the king of ignorance

If you have nothing to say better not to say anything at all maggot mouth.

How much do banks invest in oil, gas and coal? ;D

How much of the tax payers money is funneled into the fossil fuel sectors and mining sectors as subsidies and tax breaks? ;D

Do you even know how ridiculous your posts and your thread topics are Batman???

No wonder you can't handle any scrutiny and collapse into a sooky, sooky cry baby

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m7mrtx7xWA1rrpmdg.gif

Actually the IMF has just done a paper.

At page 38 it shows pre-tax subsidies down from $492b to 333b, and post-tax subsidies up from $1990b to $5302b. Pre-tax subsidies are normal business operating costs.
Post-tax subsidies are a plethora of things; among them 'non-carbon externalities (congestion, accidents, air pollution, and road damage) for vehicles'

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2015/wp15105.pdf

Now how those non-carbon externalities translate to the real world of subsidies I really don't know. Actually how do post-tax subsidies transfer to the 'evil empire'.

Ajax wrote on May 30^th, 2015 at 1:30pm:

Hey hairy arse chimp, here's something for you to ponder over banana breath, its abit out dated but its still close enough. Quote: Known Data From thermodynamics (ideal gas) One mol at one atmosphere (101.3 Kpa) @25° C = 24.465L/mol @0° C = 22.414L/mol From the periodic table (Molar mass number) Carbon (C) = 12.011g mol-1 Oxygen (O) = 15.999g mol-1 use 16g mol-1 Therefore the molar mass of CO2 is CO2 = 12.011 + (2x16) = 42.011g mol-1 From Wikipedia Current concentrations of CO2 in our atmosphere are at 0.039% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Calculations to find the total volume of CO2 in one cubic metre of air Now one cubic metre of air is equal to one thousand litres (1000L). Where L = Litres Therefore the total volume in Litres (L) of CO2 in one cubic metre (1000L) of air is 1000 x 0.00039 = 0.39 L (Total volume of CO2 in one cubic metre of air) 97% CO2 comes from the ecosystems = 97% of 0.39 = 0.3783 L _ (378.3 milliliters natural CO2) 3% CO2 comes from man = 3% of 0.39 = 0.0117 L _ (11.7 millilitres manmade CO2) Australia’s emissions are (1.5% of all manmade CO2) within that one cubic metre (1000L) of air our contribution of CO2 volume is 1.5% x 11.7 = 0.1755 millilitres that’s not even one millilitre 2. Calculations to find the total mass of CO2 in one cubic metre of air The formula to find the mass of CO2 in one cubic metre (1000L) of air is, m = n x M Where m = mass in grams n = moles M = molar mass Therefore one mole of CO2 = 0.39/24.465 = 0.01594 And the total mass of CO2 contained in one cubic metre (1000L) of air is m = n x m m = 0.01594 x 42 m = 0.6695 grams that's not even one gram 97% CO2 comes from the ecosystems = 97% of 0.6695 = 0.649415 grams (natural) 3% CO2 comes from man = 3% of 0.6695 = 0.020085 grams (manmade) Australia’s emissions are (1.5% of all manmade CO2) within that one cubic metre (1000L) of air our contribution of CO2 mass is 1.5% x 0.020085 = 0.000301275 grams that’s way below one gram.

What was the point of all that :-? :-?

Ajax wrote on May 31^st, 2015 at 9:54am:

If you have nothing to say better not to say anything at all maggot mouth.

Again with the irony.

Again with a non-rebuttal.

Haven't you any facts or figures?

lee wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2015 at 11:16am:

Again with a non-rebuttal. Haven't you any facts or figures?

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21829145.000-ocean-pump-keeps-northern-hemisphere-hot.html#.VWz6hdKqqkp

tell your bored crack smoking mate who wears the bat suit to read that  :D :D

hey i know: why dont' you both smoke some crack and read it together  :D :D :D :D :D

crack is so whacking boring that you actually argue that lomborg is a good bloke to suggest fossil fuels should be allowed to warm our kids earth by 3 degrees instead of 2!

oh yeh, never wish i gave that boring as bugger drug up:  ;D ;D ;D ;D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2015 at 11:21am:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21829145.000-ocean-pump-keeps-northern-hem...

Hello Marla had a sex change. Maybe Mala is a 280lb linebacker named Leroy.

Actually I love Ocean Heat Pump Theory, where does it mention CO2?

lee wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2015 at 11:39am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 11:21am: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21829145.000-ocean-pump-keeps-northern-hem... Hello Marla had a sex change. Maybe Mala is a 280lb linebacker named Leroy. Actually I love Ocean Heat Pump Theory, where does it mention CO2?

CO2 increases or decreases the heat pump depending on what the milankovitch cycles are doing!

It's called a complex system but you know all that  :D :D :D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2015 at 11:47am:

CO2 increases or decreases the heat pump

CO2 controls the heat pump? got it. Can we have a measurement of that?

lee wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2015 at 12:46pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 11:47am: CO2 increases or decreases the heat pump CO2 controls the heat pump? got it. Can we have a measurement of that?

Go measure it yourself :D :D

Marla wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2015 at 5:22am:

Ajax wrote on May 31st, 2015 at 9:54am: If you have nothing to say better not to say anything at all maggot mouth. Again with the irony.

Mis Muffett still with the ironing......LOL

Your like a vinyl that is caught in the same groove.

Ajax wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2015 at 6:52pm:

Marla wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 5:22am: Ajax wrote on May 31st, 2015 at 9:54am: If you have nothing to say better not to say anything at all maggot mouth. Again with the irony. Mis Muffett still with the ironing......LOL Your like a vinyl that is caught in the same groove.

...says crack head with an old man lovers mouthache! :D :D :D :D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2015 at 2:43am:

What was the point of all that [/color] :-? :-?

Just an exercise to see how much CO2 is in a cubic metre.

How much Australia contributes to this cubic metre...????

How much CO2 is natural from the ecosystems (97%)

How much CO2 is manmade (3%)

You can learn a bit if you actually understand what its showing you fuzz ball............. ;) 8-)

Ajax wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2015 at 10:26pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 2:43am: What was the point of all that [/color] :-? :-? Just an exercise to see how much CO2 is in a cubic metre. How much Australia contributes to this cubic metre...???? How much CO2 is natural from the ecosystems (97%) How much CO2 is manmade (3%) You can learn a bit if you actually understand what its showing you fuzz ball............. ;) 8-)

....you're saying those numbers don't change are you  ::) ::) ::)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2015 at 11:50pm:

Ajax wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 10:26pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 2:43am: What was the point of all that [/color] :-? :-? Just an exercise to see how much CO2 is in a cubic metre. How much Australia contributes to this cubic metre...???? How much CO2 is natural from the ecosystems (97%) How much CO2 is manmade (3%) You can learn a bit if you actually understand what its showing you fuzz ball............. ;) 8-) ....you're saying those numbers don't change are you  ::) ::) ::)

They have already changed my friend, that will not have a very big impact though.

The amount of CO2 man currently sends up into the atmosphere is now 4% of the total budget of atmospheric CO2.

The other 96% of CO2 comes from the eco systems.

The whole atmospheric CO2 budget is currently at about 0.04% of the total atmosphere.

That's 0.0004 of the atmosphere.

From that only 4% is manmade

4% of 0.0004 = 0.000016, man's contribution.

Ajax wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2015 at 6:00pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 11:50pm: Ajax wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 10:26pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 2:43am: What was the point of all that [/color] :-? :-? Just an exercise to see how much CO2 is in a cubic metre. How much Australia contributes to this cubic metre...???? How much CO2 is natural from the ecosystems (97%) How much CO2 is manmade (3%) You can learn a bit if you actually understand what its showing you fuzz ball............. ;) 8-) ....you're saying those numbers don't change are you  ::) ::) ::) They have already changed my friend, that will not have a very big impact though. The amount of CO2 man currently sends up into the atmosphere is now 4% of the total budget of atmospheric CO2. The other 96% of CO2 comes from the eco systems. The whole atmospheric CO2 budget is currently at about 0.04% of the total atmosphere. That's 0.0004 of the atmosphere. From that only 4% is manmade 4% of 0.0004 = 0.000016, man's contribution.

So you don't believe in complex systems ?

:) :)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2015 at 6:23pm:

Ajax wrote on Jun 3rd, 2015 at 6:00pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 11:50pm: Ajax wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 10:26pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 2:43am: What was the point of all that [/color] :-? :-? Just an exercise to see how much CO2 is in a cubic metre. How much Australia contributes to this cubic metre...???? How much CO2 is natural from the ecosystems (97%) How much CO2 is manmade (3%) You can learn a bit if you actually understand what its showing you fuzz ball............. ;) 8-) ....you're saying those numbers don't change are you  ::) ::) ::) They have already changed my friend, that will not have a very big impact though. The amount of CO2 man currently sends up into the atmosphere is now 4% of the total budget of atmospheric CO2. The other 96% of CO2 comes from the eco systems. The whole atmospheric CO2 budget is currently at about 0.04% of the total atmosphere. That's 0.0004 of the atmosphere. From that only 4% is manmade 4% of 0.0004 = 0.000016, man's contribution. So you don't believe in complex systems ? :) :)

I do.

Its you and your mob that don't believe in complex systems.

I mean how can you put everything bar CO2 as constant into a computer model and then come out to tell us that CO2 is the main driver of AGW.

You know the old saying for computers.

SH!T IN.......SH!T OUT.......!!!!!

Ajax wrote on Jun 7^th, 2015 at 11:04am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 3rd, 2015 at 6:23pm: Ajax wrote on Jun 3rd, 2015 at 6:00pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 11:50pm: Ajax wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 10:26pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 2nd, 2015 at 2:43am: What was the point of all that [/color] :-? :-? Just an exercise to see how much CO2 is in a cubic metre. How much Australia contributes to this cubic metre...???? How much CO2 is natural from the ecosystems (97%) How much CO2 is manmade (3%) You can learn a bit if you actually understand what its showing you fuzz ball............. ;) 8-) ....you're saying those numbers don't change are you  ::) ::) ::) They have already changed my friend, that will not have a very big impact though. The amount of CO2 man currently sends up into the atmosphere is now 4% of the total budget of atmospheric CO2. The other 96% of CO2 comes from the eco systems. The whole atmospheric CO2 budget is currently at about 0.04% of the total atmosphere. That's 0.0004 of the atmosphere. From that only 4% is manmade 4% of 0.0004 = 0.000016, man's contribution. So you don't believe in complex systems ? :) :) I do. Its you and your mob that don't believe in complex systems. I mean how can you put everything bar CO2 as constant into a computer model and then come out to tell us that CO2 is the main driver of AGW. You know the old saying for computers. SH!T IN.......SH!T OUT.......!!!!!

lol, so there is no water vapour involved all of a sudden is that what you just said?

:D :D

You better stick to sucking bones Cerberus.

Ajax wrote on Jun 8^th, 2015 at 10:02am:

You better stick to sucking bones Cerberus.

Ajax can't handle the fact CO2 and water vapour are intimately linked  :D :D

https://orders.mkn.co.uk/mime/gardengames/hexagforest.jpg

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jun 8^th, 2015 at 11:28am:

Ajax wrote on Jun 8th, 2015 at 10:02am: You better stick to sucking bones Cerberus. Ajax can't handle the fact CO2 and water vapour are intimately linked  :D :D https://orders.mkn.co.uk/mime/gardengames/hexagforest.jpg

Like I said my furry friend stick to things you can understand.

Leave the hard parts to those that know.