"Desertphile" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 03:18:55 -0700 (PDT), matt_sykes
wrote:

On 21 Aug, 01:50, Desertphile wrote:
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 03:01:39 -0700 (PDT), matt_sykes





wrote:
On 19 Aug, 17:27, Tom P wrote:
On 08/19/2010 04:49 PM, matt_sykes wrote:

On 19 Aug, 16:20,
wrote:
On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 05:58:42 -0700 (PDT), matt_sykes

wrote:
On 19 Aug, 14:20, Roger wrote:
Please see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g093lhtpEFo
"CO2 is plant food" is crock? How about sunlight? Is that also
crock? And water?

Idiot.
Estimates imply that below 200 PPM life on earth becomes
untenable.
Historical records show CO2 as high as 5000 thousand of PPM. And
our
current level is towards the bottom of that range. Life on earth
will benefit from a doubling of CO2. And since CO2 has not yet
had a
marked effect on temperature and its effect is non linear there
isnt
going to be any effect on temperature.

The problem with the "CO2 is plant food" argument is that in recent
decades the correlation between temperature and tree-ring growth
has
broken down.
You would expect an increase in CO2 to display a beneficial effect
on
tree-ring growth. But it doesn't. Trees are behaving as if the
climate
were cooling. (Remember the "hide the decline"?)
Dont tell me that CO2 doesnt encourage plant growth. Farmers have
been using it for decades to boost crop yields. So do canabis
growers.

Nobody has claimed that some plants do not do better with higher
concentrations of CO2. The problem is that food production
decreases (and has already been observed to decrease) with higher
CO2.http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-pollutant.htm

Most plantsd grow better with CO2, not some.

Odd how the scientists say differently, eh? They all must be in on
the conspiracy! Oh, how dare they?!



Yes, how dare they hide the truth!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2qVNK6zFgE









Warmest Regards



Bonz0



"It is a remarkable fact that despite the worldwide expenditure of perhaps
US$50 billion since 1990, and the efforts of tens of thousands of scientists
worldwide, no human climate signal has yet been detected that is distinct
from natural variation."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville



"It does not matter who you are, or how smart you are, or what title you
have, or how many of you there are, and certainly not how many papers your
side has published, if your prediction is wrong then your hypothesis is
wrong. Period."

Professor Richard Feynman, Nobel Laureate in Physics



"A core problem is that science has given way to ideology. The scientific
method has been dispensed with, or abused, to serve the myth of man-made
global warming."

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips



"Computer models are built in an almost backwards fashion: The goal is to
show evidence of AGW, and the "scientists" go to work to produce such a
result. When even these models fail to show what advocates want, the data
and interpretations are "fudged" to bring about the desired result"

"The World Turned Upside Down", Melanie Phillips



"Ocean acidification looks suspiciously like a back-up plan by the
environmental pressure groups in case the climate fails to warm: another try
at condemning fossil fuels!"

http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog...ly-exaggerated



Before attacking hypothetical problems, let us first solve the real problems
that threaten humanity. One single water pump at an equivalent cost of a
couple of solar panels can indeed spare hundreds of Sahel women the daily
journey to the spring and spare many infections and lives.

Martin De Vlieghere, philosopher