Tesla is fast

Get your glasses, and READ what I wrote. The elements of the carbon cycling aren't nonexistent, it's the "CO2 in the atmosphere that is out of control" and increasing. A silver teapot keeps the tea warm longer, because its surface is shiny and doesn't radiate heat. CO2 concentration in the atmosphere similarly makes our planet less capable of shedding heat.

It's the numbers that matter, and you haven't examined any of those. Those numbers show a shift in equilibrium temperature, and have done so for decades. Theory says so, measurements confirm it. Commander Kinsey and John Larkin haven't got theory or measurement, just... some bumper sticker slogans.

That's because most people are driven by social forces and perceive and believe what they imagine the rest of their tribe thinks.

That makes for wild dynamics.

The only thing that corrects tribal delusion is experiment.

This would make a good bumper sticker:

But plants grow really fast in hothouses with CO2 generators, 2x to 3x normal. Crop yields are many times what they were in 1850.

Denialist creeps do say things like that. The reality is that we do know what's going on quite well enough to understand that anthropogenic global warming is really happening, we really don't like it's effects, and letting it get worse will will make us even less happy.

In hothouses, with sprinklers to provide all the water the plants need, and the right amount of fertiliser in the water.

Real plants in the wild react to higher CO2 levels by having fewer stomata in their leaves so that they can get as much CO2 as they need while loosing less water by evaporation.

And you think it's a bad thing for some ice to melt? What proof do you have of this?

Experts my arse.

It was a long time ago, around the time they were making cars that did that sort of speed. Presumably you're not old enough to remember that.

I don't rely on any info from anyone except myself. People say things for money, political reasoning, etc.

Just what do you think was in the air before oil/coal/gas were created?

Yeah, it was Barney Oldfield who broke the minute mile in 1903.

Not the IPCC; there's hundreds of different polities that needed an independent advisor, so the UN created that group. Your 'political reasoning' doesn't apply to their work on global warming, such a broad group would never agree on any one political principle.

What time 'before oil/...' exactly are you referring to? The question makes no sense without some context.

The question was quite clear. When oil/coal/gas was created, from dead plants and animals. Those plants and animals were just fine obviously.

And before then they thought you couldn't go that fast without dying. So clearly although we always think we know everything, there's always more to learn.

They're the last people I'd trust. Would that be the same sort of group that thinks it's ok to retaliate to a violent war with just sanctions?

Oh, you mean in a time when plants and animals had been around for eons? There was CO2 in the atmosphere (from vulcanism) long before that. Gas eventually bleeds off into space, though, and is replaced slowly. Air up high is cold. CO2 is opaque to important infrared (invisible) colors that act to shed heat into space, and when there's not much of it, it radiates from warm lower elevations in the atmosphere. When there's more of it, it radiates from cold upper parts of the atmosphere (because it's opaque, lower-atmosphere heat doesn't escape into cold space).

Human history had 200- 250 ppm of CO2, and comparable total atmospheric pressure as today. until a century or two ago (coal and the age of steam). Why do you ask?

Worst reasoning ever. IPCC isn't informed by political pressure from UN, it's independence IS A POLICY that all UN nations have an interest in enforcing. IPCC earned a Nobel prize (2007), and you call them 'same sort of group...' as though that's an insight? It's a baseless slur, but worse: it's thoughtless.

There was far more CO2 back then than there is now, it did not cause a problem, it's as simple as that. Stop adding more unnecessary information.

It's a collection of stupid governments, which multiplies the stupidity. The more people in a committee, the stupider the outcome. None of them are thinking based on common sense or science, they're all thinking what will make them look good. Any government rejecting climate change will be booed at.

No, IPCC is not 'a collection of stupid governments'. Every conclusion that you derive from that premise is worthless.

Which part do you not agree with? Governments or stupid?

What makes you think what I said was an excuse, I stated a fact. In fact, f*ck you, I can't be bothered with the likes of you, you're a moronic individual no better than religious nuts. I tried to have an intelligent conversation with you, but like all the alarmists, you claim everything said against you is wrong without giving reasoning. Forget it.

False, if as you suggest 'back then' is a couple of centuries. The time of 'far more CO2' was before humanity evolved, by over 100 million years, and did not support any of the plants of today. Whether it would be a problem for people, or modern plants, is definitely NOT known.

Where did you get the idea that 'there was far more CO2 back then'? IPCC wouldn't have told you wrong, but someone did.