[palmer]

Here's where your 3.5% number comes from:

Looking at the upward arrows, man emits 7 Petagrams of carbon and nature produces 198 Pg. That means man's production is about 3.5% of nature's production. But looking at the downward arrows, there are about the same 198 downward for nature, but none for man.

[Bob434]

the bottom line, as I nhte coverstation we’ve had before about this- man’s contribution is so insignificantly small that it can’t possibly be trapping heat in any significant amounts to affect global temperatures- only a very tiny fraction of the heat trapped by man’s 0.0015% contribution of CO2 to atmosphere makes it’s way back toward earth- and that tiny fraction is OVERWHELMED by the cooled temps on earth once it makes it’s way back down-

Let’s repeat that- only a very tiny fraction of the tiny amount of heat that gets trapped by the very tiny 0.0015% CO2 produced by man gets back radiated to earth-

What percentage would you say gets absorbed by man’s 0.0015% and back radiated In the right direction towards earth? 0.05%? 1%? 5%?

Any way you slice it- mans’ contribution of CO2 to the TOTAL AMOSPHERE is far too small and insignificant to be causing global climate change-

Climates change, as shown by the graphs of preindustrial temps prove out-

And another thing you ignored in our last discussion was the fact that man has contributed more CO2 over the past decade (even though it’s still only a very tiny fraction of the total atmosphere), yet temps remained flat- They should have steadily inclining- yet they didn’t-

This is yet another nail In the coffin for the alarmists- but the m ost powerful nail is the FACT that man produces so little CO2 to begin with, and an even more insignificant amount/percentage of that 0.0015% actually makes it’s way back to earth, that it can’t possibly be causing warming-