I posted this on his web page artcle:
Dick Dorworth can call me a “Flat-Earther” all he wants and it won’t change one fact about the Global Warming debate will it? Dorworth is not trying to convince you the science is sound, he is trying to convince you that those opposed to the swindle are either evil, stupid, or weird. So much for common decency from the “tolerant” left!
The argument is not whether the planet is getting warmer or colder, what matters is whether or not we can do anything about it. That is the real argument, and an argument the AGW proponents, like Dorworth, refuse to participate in. And since AGW proponents won’t debate the carbon “crisis”, their justification for taxing and controlling industries around the world, we are left to use their own claims concerning man’s activities, as well as facts that are readily accessible, to determine the legitimacy of their case for regulating Carbon, while they call us names.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Control (IPCC) tells us that humans contribute 5% of atmospheric carbon concentrations, and Carbon Dioxide from man’s activities needs to be reduced to save the planet. For the sake of argument let’s accept their number of 5%. Since we also know that the carbon dioxide currently makes-up thirty-eight one-hundredths of one percent (.0038) of our atmosphere, it is easy to do the math to determine the outcome should we do what they tell us needs to be done. In fact, lets go farther by pretending that every man, woman, child and SUV has died and use the full 5% instead of the far smaller reduction they now expect to achieve with us all stubbornly staying alive.
By multiplying 38/100 of one percent by 5% (.0038 x .05) you get the number of .00019, or 19/1000 of 1%. Now think about that. If every person disappeared off the face of the Earth we would achieve a reduction of a colorless, odorless, harmless inert gas called Carbon Dioxide by .00019 the total of all atmospheric gases. Think about it, all this nonsense about changing our atmosphere by less than nineteen one-thousandths-of-one-percent. It’s astoundingly stupid.
Think about what they are asking us to sacrifice to change the atmosphere by far less than the number we just calculated. Consider how many jobs they are asking us to give-up for that number. Think about the freedom they are asking you to sacrifice to accomplish nothing.
How compassionate is it to advance a lie that insures the third-world will experience many more generations of hunger and poverty. It is not only absurd, it shows you just how craven and dishonest the global left has become in their quest to lord over the rest of us rubes and peasants.
Simple math demonstrates what an outrage this fraudulent Anthropogenic Global Warming campaign is. Too bad Mr. Dorworth spends his time attempting to demean people rather than learning simple math.
Charles McFarling
Indianapolis, IN
The fact that according to the ice core data CO2 is a lagging indicator not a leading indicator plus the fact we've had no warming for ten years despite increases in CO2 content leads me to believe CO2 is not the cause of the post-ice age warming.
But assume it is. The post makes the excellent point that even fairly aggressive cuts in man made emissions would be such a tiny percentage of greenhouse gases as to achieve almost no temperature reductions. Man can't change the earth's climate any more than Canute could hold back the sea.