academic paper on economics and climate change states that Co2 stays in atmosphere for up to 200 years

2 05 2011

This is a reply to a statement by john wilder who said people who think that co2 would float in the air fo a hunded years. Note the highlighted area.

for full document click link economics and climate change

Advertisements

Actions

Information

8 responses

3 05 2011
rogerthesurf

Tsk tsk,

That is a good academic paper and I took a copy of it because I am interested in the author’s economic analysis.
However sorry to say, but you may notice that the passage that you underlined is a quotation from someone elses paper and he throws considerable doubt on how likely it is. Thats why the chapter is headed “The Only Certainty is Uncertainty”.

However I do agree that the source of his quotation could have been indicated more clearly.

Cheers

Roger

3 05 2011
marriagecoach1

No I also have a major in science and subscribe to the Scientific Method which all good scientists subscribe to. You come up with a theory and then design a lab experiment to prove your theory that has to be repeatable around the world.

To date there are NO SUCH EXPERIMENTS. That is why they call it consensus. The scientific method was invented to eliminate consensus from legitimate science.

Most of the counseling I do is pro bono because I do coaching that insurance companies won’t pay for. I have an 80% success rate where tradtional marriage counselors have a horrendous 70-75% failure rate. We have the highest divorce rate on the planet due to lousy marriage counselors.

John Wilder

3 05 2011
marriagecoach1

First of all other scientists claim that we have actually increased the CO2 by 80 PPM. The fractional equivalent of that is 8/100,000ths of 1%. This is a trace amount by any objective standard and this after 100 YEARS OF THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION. Why did it increase by such a miniscule amount? Because there is slightly more for the winds to pick up and blow into the atmosphere. This is the same thing that happens in a dust storm, the winds pick up dust and it is in the air. When the winds die down, the dust and the CO2 settle out.

You still have not read my refutation, but keep trying to deal with the single element of CO2. If the scientists were really about reducing the CO2 they would call for a ban on all soft drinks. WE MANUFACTURE CO2 TO PUMP INTO SOFT DRINKs and it puts billions of cubic feet of CO2 into the atmosphere anually. Not to mention beer, wine, distilled spirits and bread baking which are all MAJOR contributors to CO2 in the atmosphere. They don’t want to stop the CO2 just tax it.

There are other equally bogus claims that I have refuted in my piece if you would take the time to actually read it.

John Wilder

3 05 2011
nemo

so what your sayin is that you, having a bachelors degree in Psychology, know more that thousands of climate scientists with PHDs.
you obviously arent a very good psychologist either, or you could afford pay off that credit card debt.

3 05 2011
marriagecoach1

by the way, the reason that so many scientists sign on to the global warming silliness is because it does no real harm and scientists depend upon research grants for their livlyhood. You can’t get research grant to do refutation research even though in legitimate science there has to be control studies and double blind studies to eliminate tester bias. To date there have been no research funding for these studies.

Scientists are railing because the ones who want to publish refutaton research like mine are blackballed from getting their papers published in scientific journals.

We have Heidi Cullen from the Weather Channel making statements like any meteorlologist who does not sign on to the politically correct view should have his credentials pulled.

John Wilder

3 05 2011
nemo

the scientists who deny global warming get payed millions of dollars to claim climate change is a hoax.

3 05 2011
nemo

you obviously arent reading those documents. They talk about how the Corporations pay these Pseudo-scientists to spread propoganda.

3 05 2011
marriagecoach1

No the climate scientists who back global warming get huge research grants to prove global warming. I am not an industry stooge, deniar or all the other names that liberals call us who attack the pseudo science of global warming.

There are no grants to do control studies, double blind studies or any other refutation studies in defiance of the Scientific Method. It is still only a THEORY because there have been no scientific experiments proving anthropogenic global warming.

John Wilder

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: