On Tuesday, August 6, 2019 at 9:46:05 AM UTC+12, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/08/2019 16:08, JGD wrote:
On 05/08/2019 15:27, Spike wrote:

But, on the other hand, no specific reason has been advanced to doubt
the provenance of the information in that particular AP article.


But even if it were accurately reported (which seems unlikely as Graham
has described) then so what? We know that there can be a considerable
lag (40-50 years, maybe more) for a given CO2 level to have its full
effect on polar ice melt, sea-level etc.

Hoe ****ing convenient for the climate shysters

When those that advocate global warming countermeasures

- stop taking plane trips to conferences

- advocate a crash program of nuclear power

- sell their beachfront properties

Then I might believe a single word they say

So the full consequences of the CO2 level in 2000 won't be seen until at
least eg 2040-2050. Maybe you could come back to this forum then and we
can review what actually happened.


Actually no climate scientists says that there will be a 50 year lag.
Its all doom in ten years and has been for the last 40.


--
Labour - a bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich
people
by telling poor people that "other" rich people are the reason they are
poor.

Peter Thompson

You won't be seen on the "other forum", and a good thing too.