I've made four attempts to post this under the original header. Each
time Google's news-reader informs me my post was successful. But the
post never appeared. Anyone else experiencing problems?

On Oct 5, 3:05 pm, Trawley Trash wrote:
On Mon, 4 Oct 2010 20:08:10 -0700 (PDT)

Roger Coppock wrote:

If you curve fit to the South Pole data you
would get a completely different answer. It
look like 2ppm per year to me.

So what does the Mauna Loa data look like to you? Best you remove
those blinkers before attempting to answer that question.

Then, you need both glasses and a high school
level math course.

I invite anyone to go to the noaa website
and see for themselves which of us needs
glasses.

It is obviously you, Ms. Trash. The website you reference clearly
shows the current level of CO2 is ca. 388, both at Mauna Loa and the
South Pole. Roger was partly incorrect. What you need is a *junior*
school course in essential numeracy.

As Ms Trash snipped the incorrect calculation she performed (I wonder
why?) I restore it for the context:
QUOTE TT "Given 90 years that works out to 180ppm + 400ppm or 580ppm
in 2100. This is no disaster, and we have 90 years to study the
problem."/quote

The correct calculation is ca.388 + ca.400 = ca.788 ppm

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/iadv/

When you go to this website please click on
the South Pole at the bottom of the map to the
right. Otherwise you will only see charts
of Mauna Loa data when you click on *submit*.

This is nonsense. The only discernable difference between them is a
seasonal effect showing up much more in the ML graph. Back to the
kindergarten for you, missey.