PAKAB almost has it right, man made catastrophic global warming alarmism is pseudoscience and climate change mitigation by restricting CO2 emissions or sequestering atmospheric CO2 is a hoax without field experiments. Due diligence, test a product before you buy. Be more careful how you spend your money.Big_Goof is able to divert meaningful discussions about global warming science by saying that it cannot be science without "laboratory experiments". That is his only position.
But not things where they advise policy, if they tell you there's a way to mitigate a man made problem they better show you man made experimental results. There's a difference between purely observational and when you dear to breach a technology or policy to improve a man made or natural situation. Then you need to produce results instead of theory, get a product off the drawing board, through the lab and into the market.By now he knows that science goes beyond laboratory experiments and uses observation for many things that do not adapt to a laboratory type experimentation.
Climate change mitigation is a big zero when it comes to demonstrations and results.
The tests of climate change mitigation are essential to the policy discussion. Don't buy a pig in a poke. Emitting CO2 is too important a freedom to give up for theory and models.Yet he persists in continuing to post his contention that all science must be performed by laboratory experiment. It is best to ignore his posts by understanding what they are, simply a diversion.
Or whether we should increase the effects, that's my plan. I stand for growth, using and producing fossil fuels and emitting carbon. That's to my best welfare and benefit. I really don't understand you, I'm sorry.Global warming is a result of adding CO2 to the atmosphere by the burning of fossil fuels. Science has established that. The discussion should progress to what steps can we take to decrease the effects.
I hope carbon dioxide paranoia is a passing fad; I find it tiresome and ugly.