Re: CO2 Funny

On 21/05/2024 1:15 pm, john larkin wrote:

This is wonderful:
 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/comment/2024/05/20/joe-biden-democrats-green-transition-evs-energy-costs/
 "Contrast Biden voter certainty with their knowledge about carbon
dioxide. Nearly one in five Biden voters think there should be no
carbon dioxide at all because it’s a poison..."
 "Forty four per cent of Trump voters and 26 per cent of Biden voters
were able to correctly identify the approximate concentration of
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere; nearly three quarters of Biden
voters were wrong by a factor of between 100 and 1000."

Typical John Larkin. The link doesn't work, the UK Daily Telegraph is an extremely right-wing newspaper, British science journalism sucks, and the statements amount to claims that if you put your thresholds in the right places you can claim that potential Trump voters are better informed than potential Biden voters.
Where those thresholds were put hasn't been specified.
As John Larkin and Cursitor Doom keep on reminding us, right-wing lunatics have very strange ideas about climate science.
The idea that 44% of Trump voters "were able to correctly identify the approximate concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere" doesn't say anything about their capacity to understand what it means.
John Larkin seems to think that it is currently too low and should be encouraged to get back to the 800ppm our remote ancestors enjoyed during the Carboniferous (when the sun was delivering less heat to the earth than it does now).
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5664543/
John is obviously wrong, though he does seem to be incapable of realisiing this. His admiration of Donald Trump is similarly irrational.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney