Spike Wrote in message:r
On 14/09/2020 16:21, Alastair B. McDonald wrote: On Monday, 14 September 2020 at 11:28:45 UTC+1, Spike wrote: On 14/09/2020 08:28, Graham Easterling wrote: it's been allowed to continue. It was always going to be difficult to get Countries to reduce carbon emissions. The economic crash of 2008 made an attempt but of course, governments were having none of that. Important steps were taken to boost car production & get CO2 emissions back on track. In a recent BBC R4 news programme, it was claimed that CO2 levels are higher now than than at any time in the last 3 million years. What was not said was that the planet has for a significant part of that time span swung in cycles of 100,000 years from being an ice-ball for 80,000 years and a desert for 20,000 years. At the present time we are about half-way through a warm part of the cycle. So why is there all this concern about CO2? Nonsense! We have been cooling for the last 6000 years. We were heading for a new glacial period, but now we are heading for the climate of the Pliocene when sea levels were 25 m higher and CO2 was at 400 ppm.Just can't trust the BBC.... If CO2 continues to increase at the current rate of 3 ppm per year, then by 2100 CO2 will be at about 600 ppm and all the ice sheets will have gone leading to a sea level rise of 65 m, with a climate to match. How much of London, Portsmouth, Southampton, Plymouth, Bristol, Cardiff, Swansea, Liverpool, Glasgow, Aberdeen, Dundee, Newcastle, Hull, or Cambridge at 5 m asl will be left after that?When the temperature falls, there is little help from CO2 levelsremaining high, so what do you propose as the mechanism for your claimedhalt of the temperature drop that you mentioned?-- Spike

Spikey

Does CO2 absorb in the infrared? If so, how much?

--
Otter Valley, Devon
20 m amsl
http://www.ottervalleyweather.me.uk