[Bob434]

NO! NOPE! Nominee!, it’s lies, all lies! man is the only one responsible for climate change. Our co2 takes up a whopping 0.0034% of the atmosphere, so obviously that “huge” amount creates a mile’s thick blanket traps all the heat on earth and won’t let any escape! /s

We don’t produce anywhere near the amount of co2 to blanket the globe and cause global climate change- not even close!

Climate alarmists are freaking out over a 400 parts per million co2 accumulation I. The atmosphere- calling it a “tipping point” and declaring life will cease. Life actuslly thrived under a more than 800 parts per million atmospheric co2 conditions in the past.

Since there were far more species kinds and subspecies back in the early days of high co2 over 800 ppm, and since we have far less species today under a 400-450 ppm atmospheric co2, I woild wager that the low 450 ppm is killing off species and propose we multip,y our co2 output more than 100 times in the slim hope that it Wil. Raise co2 levels so that species don’t die off as quick

[Yardstick]

Right, it’s not obvious to me that a warmer Earth with thriving plant and animal life is such a bad thing. In fact now that I think about it, I’m not sure that I’ve ever seen a serious analysis of the pros and cons of a warm versus a cool Earth. Bjorn Lomborg kind of goes in that direction in his book where he argues that the cost of stopping global warming would be worse than the global warming itself. But I'd like to see someone give serious treatment to the proposition that global warming is potentially a good thing with real benefits to life on this planet.