@parados,
parados wrote:So, if you selectively ignore some of the data and only include the data that you think supports your argument then you reach the conclusion you already had made. Amazing how that works out for you.
Perhaps you are envisioning yourself (by presenting a CO2 diagram from 1959 to 2005). I don't ignore any data. All the data are taken into consideration. I am showing that because you are falsifying the approximation function by drawing it as a straight line right through the data, without considering weight factors and limit points.
Besides that there is a real feasibility for the polynomial to become at some stage a combinatorial explosion (not a joke) - there is CO2 in the rocks, which may be released if the temperature continues to rise, and if the acidity of the ocean proceeds as it is going at present, at some point the plankton may go into the Dimension X, and all the CO2 that is processed by it now to remain without 'facilities for CO2 recycling' and to start accumulating into the air. Thus the combinatorial explosion is not to be excluded at some point of time in case of continuous retarded behaviour and non-taking measures to put the processes under control and in predictable track.
The only thing that can stop the CO2 is the money. The modern money mechanics of money as debt to be pronounced as lacking perspective, fake, unfair and destructive to the planet and money to be backed up the by energy- and eco-capacity - incl. facilities and methods to recycle CO2 into something safer and useful, like for example solar, wind and water power production, synthesis of methane fuel from recycling CO2 by solar energy, making NPPs on the Moon on Hellium 3 ... and supply somehow the energy 'down to the Earth', etc.
The Nothing-Doing Case Scenario and the sweeping of the problems under the table and postponing them to the distant future is one of the worst, if not the Worst Case Scenario. Anyway.
