Re: The climate crisis grows exponentially.

"R Kym Horsell" <kymhorsell@gmail.com> wrote in message news:vemc9b$drq$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...

In alt.global-warming Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>
>
"kensi" <kkensington01-NOSPAM@gmail.invalid> wrote in message
news:vek84k$h77n$1@paganini.bofh.team...

On 2024-10-14 12:38 a.m., JTEM Is Extremely KOoky burbled:

Gwobull Warbling isn't global.

>
Since you made up that term, presumably it's whatever you want it to be,
koOky. What it's not is relevant to the discussion here.
>
The earlier "warm periods" were Europe and the Mediterranean, Europe and
the North Atlantic, or similar regional warmings.

>
Prove it.

>
You can't "prove" anything to a nitwit.

That can't be true.. they were able to prove it to you.
I will just note that when asked to back up your claims the result was lame insults....
1) Ad hominen

In this case a
disingenuous nitwit.

Like this one.
2) Ad hominen

And anyone at this stage that can't accept the changes 200y of
burning material that has been out of the biosphere for 100 mn years
(therefore turning back the clock 100 mn y) must be unable
to pass grade 6 science.

Well that's a classic
3) Non sequitur

>
Even Exxon execs in the 70s acked the science.

4) Appeal to authority
What I don't see is any proof.. After all, according to your thinking.. we would NEVER have warming periods in the past, because according to you ONLY fossil fuel use could POSSIBLY cause such.
And yet, the history of climate is filled with examples of period of cooling followed by periods of warming.
So unless you can show that fossil fuel use was the cause then.. you can not assert it must be the cause not.
Could merely be a coincidence, or maybe something else entirely. Such as core temperature fluctuation. Solar luminosity/spectrum shift. We already know for a fact that Sol has a variable output. We know for example of the 11 year cycle of the sun. Who is to say there aren't other cycles. longer cycles that govern solar output and this global warmth?
You have a trend. You find something that seems to correlate.. and immediately assert causality.
We even know that CO2 in the atmosphere changes over time.. including before man was even on the scene. Indeed based on past cycles a cycle of increase CO2 could be expected at this time based on prior history.
So to simply assert this and only this MUST be the cause.. is a fallacy, unsupported by any proof.
At best you have a correlation, but mere correlation does NOT establish causality.
I would point that that even if what you said it true.. our best course of action would be to ban ALL trade with China.
Their increases in CO2 emissions dwarfs that of any other nation and the rate of increase utterly negates ANY attempt by the rest of the planet to lower CO2 emissions.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/animation-top-15-carbon-emitters-1850-2022/
So if you're serious.. I expect you to be calling for a complete embargo of Chinese goods... otherwise, piss off.