what you believe is not relevant. Reality is.
Consider.
Early in the industrial revolution, industrialization was... a pretty localized phenomenon, really. Most of it was water powered, coal was mostly used for heating in cities and the like. And there weren't really cars yet, they didn't start getting really popular until... I think about the 50s. Before that, it was probably the case that the majority of households did not own a car.
Also, the various reservoirs that our excess CO2 have been going to (such as the ocean) were essentially "empty". I'd imagine that a much larger fraction of the fossil CO2 we emitted before 1950 was absorbed by the oceans and the like.
Stay in school. Do your math homework. Learn about exponential growth. Then try climate science.
Zippi, who is mightly "alarmed" about the climate science he fears and is incapable of understanding, were he to ever try, and who is very worried about what he imagines to be other people's problems, evidently has his own little problem using correct English grammar, in which, for instance, a plural subject requires a plural form of a verb.
Your reality is fine. It's these alarmists here that are giving intelligent conversation a bad name. Their science is mostly reasoned from an alarmist point of view without any concern for who has scientific evidence against what they believe.
Hey Dook blocks anyone who would provide an intelligent answer to his questions. That's one reason why his answers and questions are irrelevant here at Y/A.
Alph and C are copycat scientists who only repeat the scientific rhetoric from the IP CC which is well known for showing bias simply due to the nature of their existence - "to provide proof that CO2 causes Global Warming".
36ppm didn't cause the rise in temperature between 1910 and the 1940s just as it didn't cause the rise in the 80s and 90s. CO2 has little bearing on current temperatures also. It didn't cause the rise in Global average temperature from Feb 1929 to December 1930 of 0.68C nor did it cause the drop of 0.75C from March of 1990 to September of 1992.
It seems that alarmists like Hey Dook has the problem with mathematics and correlating evidence to the contrary. He relies too much on Government-biased science IMO.
And it has gone up 78 since 59 and that is the most important figure.
Zippi you are so wrong, no way are Alph and C scientists
http://co2now.org/current-co2/co2-now/annual-co2.html
