Posted by: graemebird | April 26, 2009

The Looming Catastrophe Of A Precipitous Drop To Our CO2 Levels Could Happen At Any Time.

FROM ELSEWHERE

I’m not seeing enough concern amongst skeptics that the ass will not drop out of our CO2 levels. I don’t see how anyone can be confident we can maintain the levels we have now. Much less successfully raise them above 600ppm to deal with the food and energy shortages which face us. Policy ought to be to raise CO2 levels by leaps and bounds until such time as we are quits with this new little ice age. Or at least have some interim recovery from it or at least have put the alternative fission in place, that industrial development of course driven itself by expanded hydrocarbon usage.

People willingness to engage with the lunatics as if it were a collegial disagreement and not a clear case of open fraud is dangerous and deluded. And it appears that there is some implicit psychological deal going on wherein this lunatic wall-of-sound claiming a cataclysm from too much stimulus to the biosphere via CO2 means that even the skeptics have been made blind to the absolute catastrophe of a precipitous drop in CO2 levels.

THE LIKELIHOOD OF A CATASTROPHIC DROP IN CO2 LEVELS, ON THE AVAILABLE EVIDENCE COULD COME AT ANY TIME.

Just think about the available evidence. I’m talking to the skeptics now. Just think about what evidence there is linking warming to CO2 level increases and cooling to CO2 level declines. I’m not about to tip you off here because you ought to run through the available evidence in your own minds eye. That evidence which is pretty well known to all parties.

The potential for a catastrophic drop in CO2 levels ought to be the greatest worry that abounds as we head into the Landsheidt minimum.

Why am I perceiving that skeptics are blind to this danger? Is is that you’ve let yourself be influenced by some swaying towards the lunatics? The world does not respond to their ambit claims. Nor to your personal sense of optimism.

Can anyone claim for me that the evidence DOES NOT suggest that CO2 levels could plummet in an unpredictable way and at pretty much any decade going forward? Tell me what you think the evidence says.

We’ve got to shake loose from the stalling tactics of the lunatics. We are always playing within our 25 yard territory. So much so as I would venture that perhaps no other skeptic here has considered the potential disaster of a failure for us to increase CO2 levels or indeed the potential for these levels to drop precipitously.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Here is a eugenicist statement from Harry Clarke. In the face of worldwide hunger and starvation Harry Clarke has expressed his feelings on the matter:

“The book apparently argues the usual irrelevances – climate change science is a religion, CO2 is a food for plants……….”

That CO2 increases agricultural yield in the face of global food riots and starvation is held to be “IRRELEVANT” by Harry is a confession of his callousness and flippancy and could well be a confession of his being a closet eugenicist. This is the new political correctness. Anyone who is for lower CO2 levels must be considered to be in favour of human eradication. Harry personally can come here to defend himself. But though its probably loose talk in his own case, its not to be assumed that this is what is going on when younger people are against the extra robustness that CO2 gives to both our agriculture and the biosphere more generally.
MORE LATER.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. “What a whinger. Most guys would not mind being in the robber’s position (depending on how this Olga looks like).”

    We could be talking about 300 pounds of borched cabbage. Still if he didn’t want to be treated in this way he could have avoided trying to rob a bunch of women in this cowardly fashion.

  2. We could be talking about 300 pounds of borched cabbage

    No we couldn’t. Article says:

    At this point, 28-year-old Olga, whom Life.ru describes as a “delicate” girl trained in martial arts

  3. picture of Olga

    http://life.ru/news/63330

  4. How do you know thats her? I checked the link out too. I don’t know about you but my Russian aint so good.

  5. that was linked from the english article. it’s pretty obvious


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

Categories

%d bloggers like this: