Swagman wrote on Jan 14
th, 2013 at 9:25am:
rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 13
th, 2013 at 10:19pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 13
th, 2013 at 5:11pm:
Karnal wrote on Jan 13
th, 2013 at 5:08pm:
You just repeat the same thing again and again.
Yep, the truth.
And don't the AGW alarmists
hate it.
Do you say the same about people who accept gravity Gregerry?
After all - it is only a theory.
Hardly the same.
Questioning is not denying.
There is a consensus that man made CO2 emissions are mainly responsible for increasing the concentration level of CO2 in the atmosphere
No - there is empirical evidence that demonstrates that man made CO2 emissions are mainly responsible for increasing the concentration level of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Swagman wrote on Jan 14
th, 2013 at 9:25am:
however there is less consensus that this is the actual catalyst for global warming.
No. There is no consensus that CO2 a "catalyst" of anything.
WHat there is is an enormous amount of accumulated empirical data that demonstrates that CO2 in the atmosphere absorbs energy at certain wavelengths and re-emits this as heat. There is empirical data which demostrates that the amount of outgoing longwave radition is decreasing in the same wavelength bands as is absorbed by CO2 and other anthropogenic greenhouse gasses as concentration of these gasses increases, and there is empirical data tha demonstartes that the amount of downward radiation re-emitted by these gasses is increasing as the concentration of the gasses increases.
Swagman wrote on Jan 14
th, 2013 at 9:25am:
It is therefore prudent to think about reducing CO2 emmissions but not at the expense of your nation's competitive advantage and certainly not at the expense of your nation's enterprises without similar action from your nation's major competitors.
No - that is not prudent at all, since there have been numerous economic analyses done which clearly indicate that the cost of inaction will far outweigh the cost of reducion emissions.
Swagman wrote on Jan 14
th, 2013 at 9:25am:
Eco-socialists like the Green party don't give a rat's rectum about enterprise or maintaining competitive advantage as they are ideologically opposed to free enterprise and capitalism.
They use (have hijacked) the anthropogenic global warming theory as a political tool for their political ends (which is anti-capitalism)
The carbon tax is just a string in the bow of the eco-socialist's political agenda. Another spanner in the works for capitalism, a means to redistribute wealth and you guys are sucking it up because they've convinced you that the sky is falling.
Yes - your conspiracy theories are all very interesting. But in future - please keep them to yourself.
Swagman wrote on Jan 14
th, 2013 at 9:25am:
If the sky was indeed falling, and CO2 emissions / concentrations was the culprit then Governments (and Scientific community) would be pulling out all stops to restrict CO2 emissions. They would be advocating the building of many more nuclear power generating facilities as they are the most efficient and effective means of reducing CO2 concentrations in the short term.
Eco-socialists (like the Greens Party) are totally against nuclear power even to reduce CO2 concentrations that will save the world, which just exposes their insincerity about global warming and emphasises the fact that they are conning everyone.
No. Nuclear power is not the
"most efficient and effective means of reducing CO2 concentrations in the short term." when the actual energy used in the mining, transportation and processing of fuel, manufacture of cement for the concrete structures and eventual decommissioning of plant is taken into consideration. Better alternatives already exist.
Forum
Pages: 
Climate-Change Denial Feels The Heat. (Read 11160 times)
