no
his fundamental position is a huge amount of time , effort, resources & money will be spent trying to 'FIGHT" climate change, all of which should be spent on adaptation
Not because of CO2
Your value is based on the RPC8.5 scenario which has been the basis for all the climate alarmist propaganda
The RPC8.5 scenario has been shown to be implausible as it is based on a massive increase in coal usage & the scenario is also internally conflicted as iit projects both explosive growth in 3rd world development & the 3rd world becoming an uninhabitable wasteland
the RPC8.5 scenario is not going to happen
We are still emerging from an ice age , so temperature increase are plausible
but that is not due to C02
Do not misrepresent me & do not be so ridiculous.
water vapor is not at all a danger to the atmosphere
Water / Water vapor is the universal coolant / temperature regulator
Carbon dioxide is the basis for all life on the planet, C02 is not a pollutant
you exhale 5000 ppm of CO2 with every breath
Absorption of electromagnetic radiation by organic molecules has a logarithmic relationship to concentration
diminishing incremental absorption with incremental increases in concentration
the 15 micro absorption band is saturated
View attachment 247889
water vapor concentration is variable across latitude , longitude and altitude
water covers 2/3 of the planet & has for billions of years
believing water vapor causes damage mankind can control is absurd
And Exxon Mobil also very likely had research papers which took the opposite position the 1960s and 1970s as the climate lunacy did not start until the 1980s
the 1960s & 1970 were more of an ice age cometh kinda decades
too funny
the climate models have been am abysmal failure,
they have consistently run too hot
they can not reproduce the past
They do not account for cloud formation
They all have a primary driver CO2
our climate system is non-linear, dynamic and chaotic
you can not model chaos
btw the surface temperature data record is mess
View attachment 247888
a court of law does not validate or invalidate a scientific hypothesis
not at all
physics is an amazing discipline, based on testing experimental observations vs hypothesis & the repeatability of test observations
climate science has degenerated into pseudo
science, where fraudulent hockey stick graphs
are generated for propaganda purposes
there is nothing to cheer about wrt climate alarmism
the proposed solutions to a non-problem will kill millions and drive billions into abject poverty