How much of the atmospheric CO2 is anthropogenic?

Debunk House & American Geophysical Union journal ^

[Talisker]

If mankind had never burned any coal, oil or natural gas, atmospheric CO2 levels would only be 30 to 50 ppmv lower than the current ~385 ppmv. And... There's no evidence that anthropogenic CO2 emissions have caused any warming in the last decade. The Earth has not warmed over the last 11 years.

Or in the last thousand years

[Talisker]

I think this is it:

Is the airborne fraction of anthropogenic CO2 emissions increasing?

Sorry about that, I assumed the link would be in the article.

[BillM]

The real truth about the hydrological cycle.

http://miltonconservative.blogspot.ca/2011/02/simple-chemistry-and-real-greenhouse.html

[Bob434]

The atmosphere’s CO2 % due to man is... wait for it... 0.0036%

The atmosphere’s CO2 due to ALL sources is ... wait for it ... 0.04%

The Atmospheric CO2 % due to the US (assuming we produce about 20% of the total of man’s CO2) is ... wait for it ... 0.00072%

For our dear leader to claim that man is responsible for climate change shows a complete lack of understanding- to claim that 0.0036% of the atmosphere can capture enough heat and back radiate it to earth to cause climate change is simply idiotic. To claim this is akin to claiming that pouring a glass of 100 Degree water into an Olympic sized pool of 99 degree water will cause ‘catastrophic temperature change’

Sadly though not one republican will point these facts out- There simply is NOT enough CO2 to capture enough heat to cause ANY change whatsoever- claiming it can shows a profound lack on understanding

[Techster]

Bookmark Thanks for the post!

[ETL]

Jane Fonda sounds climate change alarm in Toronto
The Star ^ | July 4, 2015 | Christopher Reynolds

"The climate change problem is the issue of our civilization. It will affect everything about our lives if we don't do something about it," she [Jane Fonda] says.
___________________________________________________

Here's Hanoi Jane remarking on the agenda that Obama refers to as (quote)
"The fundamental transformation of the United States of America"...

November 22, 1970 -- During a fund-raising tour for GI deserters, Vietnam Veterans Against the War and the Black Panthers, Jane Fonda is quoted in the Detroit Free Press as telling a University of Michigan audience:

"I would think that if you understood what communism was, you would hope, you would pray on your knees that we would someday become communist," and "The peace proposal of the Viet Cong is the only honorable, just, possible way to achieve peace in Vietnam."
http://www.wintersoldier.com/index.php?topic=Timeline
______________________________________________

Fonda made the following statement at the University of Texas:
"We've got to establish a Socialist economic structure that will limit private profit-oriented businesses. Whether the transition is peaceful depends on the way our present governmental leaders react. We must commit our lives to this transition ...... We should be very proud of our new breed of soldier. It's not organized but it's mutiny, and they have every right." --Karen Elliott Dallas Morning News December 11, 1971

From 1972: "I am not a do-gooder, I am a revolutionary. A revolutionary woman."

*******************************************************************

No great surprise here...

From RushLimbaugh.com:
Hanoi Jane Endorses Obama
April 3, 2008

REPORTER 1: Jane, who are you voting for?

REPORTER 2: Who gets your vote?

FONDA: Obama.

REPORTER 2: Oh, my God. Heaven help us all.

RUSH: The reporter for TMZ said, "Oh, God. Heaven help us all." Obviously the reporter is an Obama supporter.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_040308/content/01125111.guest.html

[ETL]

Bin Laden blasts US for climate change

January 29, 2010

CAIRO - Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden has called for the world to boycott American goods and the U.S. dollar, blaming the United States and other industrialized countries for global warming, according to a new audiotape released Friday.

In the tape, broadcast in part on Al-Jazeera television, bin Laden warned of the dangers of climate change and says that the way to stop it is to bring "the wheels of the American economy" to a halt.

Bin Laden blasts US for climate change
http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/bin-laden-blasts-us-for-climate-change/

[ETL]

"Charles Manson, the notorious cult leader, has broken a 20-year silence in an interview from his prison cell to warn the world of an impending apocalypse due to global warming.

[snip]

"Everyone's God and if we don't wake up to that there's going to be no weather because our polar caps are melting because we're doing bad things to the atmosphere," he said.

"The automobiles and fossil fuels are destroying the atmosphere and we won't have air to breathe".

Charles Manson breaks silence to warn of global warming
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8460868/Charles-Manson-breaks-silence-to-warn-of-global-warming.html

[polymuser]

Yes, I'm certain that a 7% increase of the 0.038% CO2 in our atmosphere will cause drastic temperature change.

And the that the following two things have relatively little impact.

,

[11th Commandment]

Let’s not forget that man was making heat energy before the industrial revolution- mainly burning wood. I recall areas of Europe and the Americas virtually deforested due to wood burning. (I recall that Greenland was totally deforested by settlers.) History does record that coal saved the forests. My point is for man’s impact on CO2, we can not just begin with the industrial revolution and also proving the BS of global warming.

[Bob434]

it doesn’t even really matter whether nature has a mechanism or not- the real issue is that man doesn’t produce nearly enough CO2, nor does nature, to cause any climate change whatsoever-

The total amount of CO2 In the atmosphere is just 0.04% of the atmosphere- This is the real issue- there isn’t enough to do anything. Either the CO2 I n the atmosphere in small insignificant pockets around the globe, OR it’s one continuous ‘blanket’ so thin that any heat escaping earth quickly saturates it preventing it from absorbing any more, allowing the heat to blow right on past it- and only a small insignificant percent of the captured heat actually makes it’s way back to earth because atmospheric CO2 radiates the heat it captures out in all directions- not just back towards earth-

And when this insignificantly small amount of heat actually makes it’s way back to the surface of the earth- it is quickly overwhelmed by the current temperature and reaches equilibrium so fast that it’s simply silly for climate alarmists to claim it is changing the climate. It’s just like the example of the pool I gave in my last post- The small amount can simply not overwhelm the larger- especially when the small amount is so insignificantly small like it is with atmospheric CO2 back radiated heat

Try to picture over 99% of the escaping/rising heat going right on past the CO2 In the air- you are left with just less than 1% of escaping heat being absorbed, and less than that amount actually being back radiated-

Climate change due to man simply can’t happen- Not even if we increase our carbon output by a 1000 percent- even if we multiply all our businesses and homes and fossil fuel burning by many many times- We simply can not produce enough CO2 to do anything regarding the climate-

[Techster]

The numbers in your post certainly puts the issue into the proper perspective.

Wait until the “Dark Winter” is upon us! What will they be saying then?

[ETL]

Let's not forget that man was making heat energy before the industrial revolution-- mainly burning wood. I recall areas of Europe and the Americas virtually deforested due to wood burning. (I recall that Greenland was totally deforested by settlers.)

If you don't mind my asking, how old are you??

Just kidding! :)

[Blueflag]

That’s more about methane and water vapor - both of which are more powerful greenhouse gasses than CO2

[Blueflag]

Don’t leave out the phytoplankton in the photic zone of all the bodies of water.

They are a tremendous ‘carbon sink’

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

Statistically?

Zero.

[Vendome]

Really?

Seems like it would make plants wilt more than CO2 but, I digress.../S

[Steven Tyler]

1) Get one pencil, and one 8.5 inch by 11 inch piece of paper.
2) Tap pencil on paper four times, creating four small dots.

Assume the piece of paper is one unit of atmosphere. The four pencil dots are the CO2 components.
The man made CO2 is a fraction of those four dots.

Those four dots somehow control the climate? Really!!

CO2 does not cause Global warming

[Bob434]

They will blame man for climate change still Stating “Oh we predicted a possible climate cooling- our models showed it could last awhile”

They have heir answers all prepared- They are already preparing for a possible cooldown by stating their is a ‘giant blob of cold’ in the ocean (can’t remember the location right now) that they are claiming ‘could affect weather patterns around the globe’

It doesn’t matter which way the wind blows- they will always blame man for it and the people of the planet wil believe them unfortunately

[Dad was my hero]

Sometime a while ago and I don’t have the source I remember seeing or reading that out of the 400 ppm humans produced 4% of that or 16 ppm.

[Bob434]

That’s a great visual for envisioning just how ridiculous the claim that man is causing climate change really is-

But be prepared to have people look at you with glazed over eyes when you try to show them visually how much CO2 man produces- they will look at you like you are a ‘climate change denier’