Jo wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:
Hey, Jo, I enjoyed reading your clever wriggling in your efforts to
make plainasthenoseonyourface statistics say something else than what
they plainly say. But, in the end, when one series lags another and
there is a causal connection, the plain truth is always that the
lagged series, in this case CO2 levels in the atmosphere, are caused
by the leading series, in this case global warming.


Yes, global warming events can be triggered by factors other than CO2
emissions. For example, many of these trigger events were small increases of
solar flux due to Milankovitch cycles. However, once an initial warming has
occurred and caused some greenhouse enhancing CO2 release there are several
strong positive feedback systems which ensure that the temperatures and CO2
levels will continue to rise long after the initial trigger event has ended.

Okay. So now you admit Mother Nature causes global warming, which is
what the statistics tell us.

The current trigger event is, itself, a significant release of CO2 caused by
human activities.

Prove it. The actual fact is that there is zero correlation between
high levels of human activity and global temperature and that the
Greenies try to make their lies stick by choosing tiny shortrun
ripples which fade into the background noise of all statistics when
relevant long-term series are considered.

Repeat: Global warming causes CO2 emissions. CO2 emissions do not,
repeat not, cause global warming. Whole "environmentally concerned"
empires fall on that truth.

Repeating something does not make it true.

Repetition is required because you appear to think that global warming
is caused by CO2 emissions which happened 700 years *after* the global
warming you are trying to claim it caused. There's dumb, and there's
dumber, and there're environmentalists, who are off the scale of
dumbness.

The greenhouse properties of CO2 can easily be demonstrated in any
reasonably equipped physics lab and are also well explained at the molecular
level. So, perhaps you could explain the mechanism that prevents CO2, a
known greenhouse gas, from acting as a greenhouse gas ?

It's for this sort of irrelevant smoke-blowing and incompetent
weaseling that I compare environmentalists to their cousins in
irrationality and deceit, the marxists. The question is not whether
CO2 is a greenhouse gas but whether it initiates global warming or
whether global warming releases the CO2. Clearly, the statistics tell
us global warming from solar activity releases the CO2. To say
different is to lie, and the statistics prove that the
environmentalists have been deliberately and systematically lying for
decades.

The vastly destructive Kyoto Agreement is based on this lie; the money
spent on that lie for Kyoto alone will cause hundreds of millions to
starve when we could have fed them and lifted them out of poverty and
disease and still have had some money left over for AIDS research.

Even after you prove, which you haven't yet, that CO2 causes global
warming, you still have to prove people are responsible. The
statistics tell us that humans are by far not the greatest producers
of greenhouse gases (cows probably are...). Nor can greenhouse gas
levels be linked to periods of greater human activity -- the
statistics give the lie to that claim.

Your entire environmental belief is unscientificically based on faith
alone, Jo; well, actually, also on a whole scad of shameful lies. And
it is motivated by the same despicable urge that drove the Marxists,
the desire to control the actions of your fellow humans without
submitting yourself, because you know that on the (non-existent)
merits of your argument you are unelectable, to democractic process
and scrutiny.

Jo

Personally, I think the environmentalists are a worse danger to the
future of humanity than a few thousand disturbed ragheads; we have a
"Muslim terrorist threat" only because the Americans overreacted to
9/11, hardly on a world scale a significant body count. We have been
successfully putting down raghead fanatics for centuries without ever
breaking sweat but environmentalism is a virulent disease with which
we have infected ourselves, caused by the same tendency to wallow in
vicarious guilt that turned the intellectual classes commie for most
of the last century, including well after it became abundantly clear
to anyone with two brain cells to rub together that Marxism was built
on a big, murderous lie. Environmentalism stands on the same cusp as
Communism circa 1937, where the intelligent and observant can already
see the lie but the destruction and the cost in lives is still veiled
except to those who study the lessons of history with open minds.

Andre Jute
People before control freaks

PS Hands up those who think I should cut Jo a break because she's a
girl. Now hands up those who think I should step on Jo hard because
women are intrinsically more intelligent than men and therefore more
despicable when they weasel like Jo does. Now hands up the vast
majority who think I should stomp Jo terminally because a girl has no
place on an audio conference... a right bunch of fascists you are!