On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 07:34:19 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, November 27, 2019 at 9:55:08 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
writes:
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 06:20:55 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:


The US had just 5 percent of the world's population, yet we emit 15 percent
of the greenhouse gases. It's not from burning forests, just open your
eyes and look around.



The question is would it really make any difference? CO2 started
rising as the population started rising, long before we knew what to
do with oil

Total claptrap. Your chart doesn't mean what you think it means.

The uptick in population at the far end of the chart happens
to correlate quite well with the uptick in fossil fuel usage
(i.e. the Industrial Revolution) over the same period of time.

And from 0 to ~1900 or so, the chart of population shows a significant
rise, while the chart of CO2 is flat or down. IDK what his illogical point
even is. That CO2 tracks human population, is true. But the next logical
step is what are humans doing that is causing it. The scientific consensus,
by those that have actually done the research and run the numbers, say
it's overwhelmingly from burning fossil fuels, not from burning forests.

You are ignoring the charts or you have them flipped in your mind.
CO2 started rising long before the population did, roughly starting
around the time we started agriculture. Population growth trailed that

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/Population%20vs%20CO2.jpg