If you want to see one of the effects of CO2, follow these steps:
1. Lock your ass up in a small air-tight box
2. Breath for an hour
3. Die

Congratulations, you have now figured out the poisonous effects of CO2.

Would you like to see climate science done as science? Here ya go:
http://www.berkeleyearth.org/

Your particular view here on political interaction is mind-boggling. Of what relevance is any legislature’s view on natural phenomenon? Do gravity or thermodynamics require Congressional declaration to have any force? If that body produced a unanimous resolution against evolution, would antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria immediately stop appearing (as ex-post-facto principles apply, I’ll assume we humans will not instantaneously revert to protozoa.) Or perhaps they shouldn’t go quite that far and merely declare that Lysenkoism is the True American People’s Biological Science? Certainly all work critical of it should be dismissed outright as Denier Science and banished from the reic– err, curriculum. See, science that needs government to back it is rarely complete or correct. And governments that involve themselves in science are rarely beneficial or benign.

Hey Paul; do me a favor– go out in the middle of the street at a stop light, squat down behind a car and take in a big ol’ whiff of that harmless C02 from someone’s tailpipe, then get back to me on how healthy it is.

Unfortunately, CO2 is only one of several gases present in vehicle exhaust. Given PiS’s lack of connection to reality on this topic, I would as soon expect him to blame the water vapour or unburnt fuel for any ill effect he suffered in such an experiment.

Hey Paul; do me a favor– go out in the middle of the street at a stop light, squat down behind a car and take in a big ol’ whiff of that harmless C02 from someone’s tailpipe, then get back to me on how healthy it is.

I gave up reading your post after you called me an enthusiast. I stated neither a pro nor against opinion, just that I found your argument particularly misleading and irrelevant based upon an ignorance or misunderstanding of how journalists work. The fact that you build a strawman out of my comments suggests you don’t want to have a proper conversation, you just want to hear what you want to hear.

Skimming the rest of your comment shows you care neither to corrrect that ignorance/misunderstanding, or defend it. You are a troll, and no further comments will be made by me in response to your expected reply.

Like I said… nyah nyah nyah.

Well flip then you would be lumped into the same group with all the other global warming enthusiests, because the science behind “Climate Science” is worse than we thought and trending down at an alarming rate.

The trends in climate today are not global, remarkable, unprecedented, catastrophic and cannot be attributed to anthropogenic influence beyond limited regional land use forcings.

Here is more IPCC science after Pachauri, the Chairman of the IPCC attributed earthquakes, tsunamis, etc on Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming Cooling. Anything that happens is due to CAGWC.

The Hindu : Other States / West Bengal News : Climate change-triggered high sea level led to more damage in Japan: Pachauri
“KOLKATA: The devastation caused by the tsunami in Japan would have been significantly less had there not been such a high rise in the sea level due to climate change “as the phenomenon tends to be a multiplier of the threats that take place,” Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said here on Monday.”
-http://www.hindu.com/2011/03/23/stories/2011032356101000.htm

The IPCC(The Gold Standard in Climate Science) is a funding tool of the United Nations and the multiple Eco-Activist Organizations that provided a significant portion of the non-peer-reviewed papers that the IPCC 2007 AR4 inflicted against not only the science community but the world itself. In time science may recover but it is doubtful Eco-science will ever be thought of as anything but biased.

btw: TBC giving up on an untenable position is totally understandable, there are groups worldwide constantly attempting to coverup and abscure the “Climate Science” that is spewn from the IPCC. It has not been working.

As someone who has interviewed people for articles, I can say that your assumption of the Times of India article is incorrect; TBC has it right. When we are trying to summarise a person’s words – which might not have been stated as succinctly as you like – it is rephrased, and no quotes are used because it’s not a direct, actual quote. In doing so, it’s easy for the journalist to slip in their own language, which might not reflect either the person’s statements nor the science.

#177 Paul in Sweden

You provide your own quote of Patchauri, the chairman of the IPCC from the University itself which is nearly identical to my reference from the Times of India:

Nearly identical isn’t the same as identical. One word transcripted incorrectly is not the same thing as quoting someone.

I’ll take the slideshow/university summary over a non-quoted sentence in an article any day. Even if the person actually said it during a non-recorded presentation, you have not proved that he did say it.

The rest of your argument sits on this minute and irrelevant point.

We got it, you don’t believe in global warming. But atleast come up with a better argument than “nyah nyah nyah”, which is all you seem to be doing. That and going off on tangents.

#192 Paul in Sweden

What blatant quote mining. And building of strawmen. No wonder TBC gave up on you. You’re an idiot if you think anyone reading won’t notice what you did.

BlackCat, will you be terribly disappointed if Congress does not pass a bill stating that the earth is the third planet from the sun?

I would be terribly dissappointed if they rejected on because they didn’t believe it.

The fact that you totally ignored my question leads me to assume that it was an accurate representation of your tactics.

BlackCat, your latching on to the omission of earthquakes in the Times of India news less abridged report of the Chairman of the IPCC blew my mind.

What?! I seriously can come to know other conclusion that that you think that nobody here can actually read the comments and see how transparently false this is.

What I latched onto wasn’t the Times of India at all, what I latched on to you was you repeatedly insisting that he mentioned earthquakes when you knew didn’t. You criticized him for mentioning earthquakes over and over again long after I pointed out that he never did. The problem here isn’t the Times of India, the problem is you.

Trying to twist this into me crusading against some random newspaper when it was only ever about you blatant dishonesty is simply another example of your dishonesty.

From your comments it appears to me that you for some unknown reason attribute Floods, heat waves, water scarcity, tsunamis to human activity. When confronted, you say “well… shucks… I know it has not happened in the past but I’m only sayin’ that Floods, heat waves, water scarcity, tsunamis will happen more frequently in the future, yeah, in the future that is what I think or have been told, those things will happen in the future…”

We weren’t suffering from global warming in the past. At least not to the degree we will be in a few decades if things keep going as they have been.

Your argument seems to be as follows:

1. The predictions say event A is going to happen in the future. It hasn’t happened yet.

2. The predictions says event A is going to cause problems B, C, and D.

3. So show me which problems of type B, C, and D in the past were caused by A.

The obvious problem with this is that event A wasn’t a problem back then.

Did you somehow get the bizarre we think global warming is going to alter the space-time continuum and affect events before it even started? That is the only way I can think of that your demands are even the slightest bit relevant.

Of course it would not be at all outlandish that you think this giving your bizarre and apparently intentional misunderstanding of the actual claims of the scientific community on this subject.

BlackCat, if you thought prior to this thread I could not think less of you — You were wrong.

Thank you. Considering your standards of honesty and discussion, the less you think of me the better I will feel. I would be quite disappointed in myself if someone like you thought highly of me.

Prior to this thread I thought of you as one of the good guys. Right now I can’t imagine why.

Probably because I wasn’t explicitly calling you out on your lies.