The Salesmen of the Green New Deal

The Greenhouse Effect was discovered in the mid 1800's. In 1896, Svante Arrhenius was the first to publish rough calculations for the increase in global temps as a result of increasing CO2 in the atmosphere:https://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdfNo mention of ozone anywhere in that paper. No mention of CFC's. More than 100 years ago we knew how the Greenhouse Effect worked, and why increasing CO2 in the atmosphere would increase global temps. None of the facts, science, or consensus has changed since then. More CO2 in the atmosphere means more heat trapped. It's basic physics. Trying to cast doubt on the connection between ozone thinning and CFC's does nothing to change these facts.What you seem to be complaining about is the environmental movement in general. This can be traced back to the mid 1900's as industrial processes and urbanization created really bad pollution. For example, leaded gasoline was banned after shockingly high levels of lead were found in the environment. Controls for car emissions where put in place after horrendous smog in large cities. Many industrial chemicals were banned after they poisoned rivers and streams (e.g. PCB's). Do you want to return to past times with more pollution?

Smog in LA in 1958:
I was born in 1974, so I kind of caught the tail end of the worst of it. I do remember leaded gasoline being everywhere. If I remember correctly, people my age are amongst the last children to have experienced dangerous lead levels due to leaded gas. 102 to 109 hi's for the next 7 days where I am (Boise, ID). At least it cools off at night and the mornings are in the 70's.

There's also some really poor logic. He seems to be arguing that CFC's are incapable of depleting the ozone layer because one of the CFC's is useful for putting out fires. He might as well argue that asbestos is completely safe because it is very useful for insulating hot objects.To be fair, the ozone layer does play a very minor role in global climate. However, it is a very small percentage compared to the impacts caused by carbon emissions. There's also the fact that CFC emissions have been drastically cut, so they aren't expected to have any long term effects.

quote:

---

Ozone depletion and climate change are linked in a number of ways, but ozone depletion is not a major cause of climate change.
Ozone Depletion and Climate Change - Defra, UK

---

Yeah, it's just the same ol' "pwn the libs" attitude. It appears Truth Social can spill over onto EvC once in a while.Those evil, evil people who think it's a bad idea to deplete our ozone layer and warm our planet with carbon emissions. I guess if the world is created by God physics stops working or something so we don't have to worry about the consequences of pollution.

CO2 does not stop being a greenhouse gas just because plants use it to synthesize sugars. The calculations were first done in 1896. That's part of the evidence. We already have a rough estimate of how much warming there should be for a given increase in CO2. It's based on solid chemistry and physics, none of which you have challenged in any meaningful way.Further modeling of the climate has shown that nearly all of the warming over the last century is human caused.
Causes of Climate Change | Climate Change Science | US EPAThe blue region is the model where human activity is factored in. The green region is where human activity is taken out of the model. As you can see, the model where human activity is included (i.e. increasing CO2 in the atmosphere) matches the actual temperatures. If not for humans, temperatures would be where they were in the early 1900's.We have the evidence. It is certainly valid to criticize policies that are meant to solve the problems caused by human activities. However, it isn't valid to deny that the problems exist. Not liking the Green New Deal is not a justification for denying the science that evidences global climate change. So we should start making asbestos oven mitts because the Holocaust was immoral? If we ban asbestos, surely the Jews are next. It seems you are blind to the fragility of nature. What do you think happened to the passenger pigeon, or the dodo?Added in edit:It is also worth pointing out how much CO2 humans have put into the atmosphere.Natural levels of CO2 bounce between about 180 and 300 ppm. The graph above is a bit out of date because we are currently at 422 ppm. That's about a 40% increase over natural levels. We also know that this increase is due to burning fossil fuels. When plants use CO2 to make sugars they favor the lighter isotope of carbon, 12C. Consequently, fossil fuels are lower in 13C, the heavier carbon isotope. What have we seen during this rapid rise in atmospheric CO2? A drop in 13C.

Challenge accepted. While USA 1776 may be too far down the culture war rabbit hole to be saved, there still might be visitors who will find value in some of these posts.

One very important lesson is kitchen fires. If you are frying something in oil and the oil catches on fire, DO NOT USE WATER!!! The best method is to smother the fire with baking soda, or better yet have a fire extinguisher in your home (fully charged and checked annually). If you don't have baking soda, try to move the fire to a safe place off of heat and let it burn out. I actually have a cousin who suffered severe burns from a kitchen oil fire, it's not something want to mess with.Stepping down from the soap box . . . The hubris of the conspiracy theorists and science deniers is quite the thing to behold. They don't know the science they are rejecting, and yet they think the people who have studied the science for the majority of their adult life are all wrong. After demonstrating their ignorance and hubris, they then expect people to think they are right about religion.

quote:

---

It is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel [unbeliever] to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn … If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well, and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books [Scriptures], how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason?
--St. Augustine

---

Are you trying to say that because Halon can put out fires it means it can't deplete ozone in our atmosphere?

Predictable. Just bury your head in the sand and pretend the evidence doesn't exist.Your inability to address any of the evidence that has been supplied to you demonstrates our point. If the evidence were on your side then you wouldn't have to claim it is concocted.