Battle of the global warming alarmists - Basketcase vs. Frankfooter

[Frankfooter]

This is how the IPCC gets their estimate, courtesy of the USGS (2010):


and Gerlach based his global estimate on researching 7 volcanoes and 3 hydrothermal vents.

How did he get his numbers from historical eruptions?

 

[Frankfooter]

The IPCC has no way of determining what amount of the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere is produced by volcanoes and deforestation, just two examples.
FAST

Too bad this is just the opinion of an incoherent fool, otherwise it might be worth considering.
But when your basic claim relies on a 30+ year conspiracy theory, where 130 countries are all subjugating the research of over 4000 scientists all at the whim of the what you claim is the all powerful UN, you have to realize that nobody looks at your posts seriously.

 

[Moviefan-2]

Hey liar, here's the quote, and the link to the post is embedded in the header, the small 'double arrow' icon after your avatar appears:

Yeah, I know how it works. Why don't you try actually opening the link -- not only is the single word "predictions" not in quotation marks, as you have it, but the word doesn't even appear in the sentence you quoted (the sentence says "projections").

https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-Frankfooter&p=5548122&viewfull=1#post5548122

You rewrote the sentence and put "predictions" in quotation marks to change the meaning of the sentence.

And, again, you still provide nothing that explains where your "still fits" conclusion came from.

(By the way, can I add the fact that you think "on" and "from" are the exact same word to your greatest hits? After all, you seem pretty adamant that they are the exact same.)

 

[FAST]

Too bad this is just the opinion of an incoherent fool, otherwise it might be worth considering.
But when your basic claim relies on a 30+ year conspiracy theory, where 130 countries are all subjugating the research of over 4000 scientists all at the whim of the what you claim is the all powerful UN, you have to realize that nobody looks at your posts seriously.

I have made no such claim,...never have,...you are the one who constantly brings up conspiracy theory's.

Until you actually produce proof,... of the percentages of each individual source of CO2 in the atmosphere,...then STFU.
And a list of links you don't read, let alone understand, is not proof or a rebuttal,...plus,... your constant childish insults is not debating,...but simply running away,...again

Just to show how comical this show is,... just how the hell can you justify over 4000 climate scientists, as I have already pointed out,...utterly ridiculous.

Sounds like some commie country were you have 10 people doing a one person job, but I guess that would be your dream.

FAST

 

[fuji]

There's actually a relatively straight forward way to find out what percentage of CO2 humans create. Namely, add up all the CO2 created by humans and compare it to the total CO2 in the atmosphere. The difference is the naturally produced CO2.

Extend that simple idea to a global database of all sources of carbon emissions and all sinks that trap carbon and you have Carbon Tracker:

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/carbontracker/tutorial.php