This is how idiotic you eggheads are with this stuff. I went to that website and read the report. It said the Co2 level is the highest in 3 million years or some such BS. As far as I know, there were no cars, factories, aerosol cans, white people, republicans, guns, cigarettes, Boy Scouts or even Tea Parties on earth then.
What made the Co2 level so high back then? How did they lower it for us terrible Americans to screw it up all over again
3 MILLION YEARS LATER???
It's a rhetorical question. Don't bother answering.
Think I'll go put some catalytic converters on cattle to control their emissions :rolleyes:
Hate to say this, Bill...but don't get sucked into the apochraphyl rants of the moronic Minnesota main global warming toady. He reads and posts his charts as if they are gospel, since they are spewed by so-called scientists that he can't seem to understand they are only presenting their tripe so they can continue to receive their freebies from the taxpayers.
But then...Henry comes from the loony-tunes state of Minnesooooota, the latest to join the BF states of this nation. In a state with 10,000 lakes it's no wonder Henry is getting nervous, since his DL residence is no doubt due to go under when the south pole melts down.
How miserable must one be to follow no less an idiot than Algore. Just gotta love how 'principled' that loser is.
You are wasting your time by trying to present empirical evidence to flat earthers, like my brother, for instance. He had one science class in his life and nearly flunked it, but he sure can pontificate at length about the "hoax" of global warming. He has nothing to back his argument except he is sure all scientists are crooked just to get money. He doesn't read much, but he learned all about it discussing with the guys down on the Ford factory floor, so he knows more than anyone on that issue.
You're wasting your time with those that view the world through a length of one inch lead pipe. Training dogs is more productive.
But....But...They might have to give up their gas guzzler and mow their lawns with grazing sheep like back in the stone age.
Here's how dumb the libs are about Global Warming....
Dem resolution warns climate change could push women to ‘transactional sex’
By Pete Kasperowicz - 04/29/13 11:06 AM ET
Several House Democrats are calling on Congress to recognize that climate change is hurting women more than men, and could even drive poor women to "transactional sex" for survival.
The resolution, from Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and a dozen other Democrats, says the results of climate change include drought and reduced agricultural output. It says these changes can be particularly harmful for women.
"[F]ood insecure women with limited socioeconomic resources may be vulnerable to situations such as sex work, transactional sex, and early marriage that put them at risk for HIV, STIs, unplanned pregnancy, and poor reproductive health," it says.
Climate change could also add "workload and stresses" on female farmers, which the resolution says produce 60 to 80 percent of the food in developing countries.
The chances for regional conflict also increase with climate change, the resolution says, because changing weather patterns could lead to migration and refugee crises. It said these sorts of potential conflicts over land will have a disproportionate impact on "the most vulnerable populations including women."
More broadly, the resolution says climate change will hurt "marginalized" women, such as refugees, sexual minorities, adolescent girls, and women and girls with HIV. It also cites Hurricane Katrina as evidence of how climate change can affect women, noting that the storm displaced "over 83 percent of low-income, single mothers" in the region.
I don't understand your point.
We certainly wouldn't want a return to the conditions 300 million years ago. Much warmer and less hospitable to mammalian life. Likely the CO2 levels were what they were then because a younger earth was more volcanically active. Am I a believer in global warming? Let's just say I think that the jury is still out on that issue. Do I think that human activity could be having an effect on the climate, absolutely. We know that man has had some pretty extreme effects on local climate, for instance the desertification of the area around Lebanon. The denuding of the land, harvesting all the trees for construction and fuel raised the reflectance of the ground, raising the surface temperature, increasing evaporation, and eventually actually affecting the weather pattern resulting in the reduction of precip, and pushing what was once a fertile area into desert.