From: JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.global-warming,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.usa.republican
Subject: Reading 1196-2a (archive)
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2025 18:13:11 -0500
Organization: Eek
Alan wrote:
> Because the Australian government's figure for CO2 emissions was only
> about fossil fuels. So the 499 million metric tons figure he claims to
> counter doesn't include all the CO2 produced by animal life.
Actually, our brain dead climate bot, all of Gwobull Warbling hysterics
is centered on fossil fuels. That's it. The narrative even claims that
burning wood is "Green," though wood emits more CO2 than coal...
> It is a NET figure, after accounting for animal production and vegetable
> absorption of carbon dioxide...
>
> ...and the report from which it came says so:
>
> "This Report provides estimates of Australiaâs NET greenhouse gas
> emissions for the period 1989â90 to 2020â21,"
>
> "Australiaâs NET greenhouse gas emissions from all sectors were 464.8
> million tonnes (Mt) of carbon dioxide"
Can you cite this study? Because you never established HOW they
determined "Net." You claim that they subtracted what was absorbed by
all vegetation -- natural and domestic -- from what was produced by
fossil fuels. But you did not establish this, you simply claim it.
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5