Climate Craziness of the Week: Anthropogenic Girthic Warming

I would not have believed the claim if I hadn’t read it here:

So the idea is that everybody should lose ten kilos the result of which would be a drop in greenhouse emissions that would be the equivalent of 0.2% of the CO(2) emitted globally in 2007 (49.560Mt).

Good luck pulling that off. I have a proposal that may also have an impact.

Any researcher who takes public money to study global warming and produce results that dictate how the rest of us should live should give up their car and walk or bicycle everywhere.

That should have an effect.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
135 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
eco-geek
August 16, 2011 2:37 am

I tried to post the first paragraph … three lines but that wasn’t accepted. I’ll try the first line next time

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 2:39 am

OK. I tried to post the first line but that wasn’t accepted either.
Next time I’ll try the first word.

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 2:40 am

OK, I’ll try to post the first word:
The

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 2:41 am

Yippee! WUWT lets me post “The”. I’ll try a few more words from the first sentance and try to discover which words are being used by the WUWT censoring system to block my comments…

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 2:42 am

OK Here goes another try..
The only connection between Global

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 2:44 am

Yippee. I’m getting somewhere. I’ll add another word….
The only connection between Global Warming and Obesity

Alan the Brit
August 16, 2011 2:45 am

Rule one of these studies, always check the calendar just to make sure it’s not 1st April!
genomega1 says:
August 16, 2011 at 12:17 am
The fact that co2 only makes up 0.039% – by volume of earths atmosphere makes their number just a little suspect.
With manmade CO2 representing a mere 4% of that, we’re talking very, very, very, very small numbers here! 0.00156%, of which the UK produces less than 1.8% (& falling) = 0.000028%!!! Put it in perspective, “how d’ya like a pay increase of 0.000028% this year?” Take someone on £30,000/annum that means they get a wopping 84p increase a year – not even half a pint of beer’s worth!

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 2:46 am

At last! WUWT has a censoring system. I am not allowed to post the word: Ob*sity.
Lets try this one.

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 2:48 am

Well that one worked so I’ll try and post the next message with the word Ob*sity spelt with an ‘e’ instead of a ‘*”

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 2:48 am

Here it comes WUWT:
Obesity

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 2:50 am

Wow, most odd! Seems I am allowed to comment with the word “obesity” now. There is something else going on.
Sorry e-moderator but I’m getting seriously p*ssed off.

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 2:53 am

Well, I tried to post the first paragraph again but it didn’t work!
I’ll keep trying

Philip Thomas
August 16, 2011 2:53 am

We all want reasons to excuse our perceived failings and pander to our insecurities. If this psychological weakness can be exploited to create another AGW mouth then the lumumba trained green scientists will not hesitate to publish nonsense like this. Next they will say global warming causes baldness; then impotence.

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 2:55 am

Well I tried again and nothing appeared….

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 2:57 am

And again and it worked not….

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 3:00 am

It doesn’t like this..
The only connection between Global Warming and

KP
August 16, 2011 3:02 am

OK, so fatties produce more CO2 per gasp than the British Standard Human (whatever that is!) … but aren’t fatties supposed to reach their sell-by date much sooner?
So ….. more CO2 per gasp for a shorter lifespan vs. less CO2 per healthy exhalation (while jogging/in the gym/etc) over a longer period ….. hmmm, tricky, might need more research funding for that one.

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 3:04 am

The quick brown fox jumps over the obese dog

Annie
August 16, 2011 3:07 am

Is it April the First?

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 3:08 am

Last one not OK again..
WTF is going on.
Conection between Obesity and AGW

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 3:10 am

It is doing my head in.
Arghhhh!
Asteroids (from Greek ἀστήρ ‘star’ and εἶδος ‘like, in form’) are a class of small Solar System bodies in orbit around the Sun. They have also been called planetoids, especially the larger ones. These terms have historically been applied to any astronomical object orbiting the Sun that did not show the disk of a planet and was not observed to have the characteristics of an active comet, but as small objects in the outer Solar System were discovered, their volatile-based surfaces were found to more closely resemble comets, and so were often distinguished from traditional asteroids.[1] Thus the term asteroid has come increasingly to refer specifically to the small rocky–icy and metallic bodies of the inner Solar System out to the orbit of Jupiter. They are grouped with the outer bodies—centaurs, Neptune trojans, and trans-Neptunian objects—as minor planets, which is the term preferred in astronomical circles.[2] This article will restrict the use of the term ‘asteroid’ to the minor planets of the inner Solar System.
There are millions of asteroids, and like most other small Solar System bodies, asteroids are thought to be the often shattered remnants of planetesimals, bodies within the young Sun’s solar nebula that never grew large enough to become planets.[3] A large majority of known asteroids orbit in the asteroid belt between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter or co-orbital with Jupiter (the Jupiter Trojans). However, other orbital families exist with significant populations, including the near-Earth asteroids. Individual asteroids are classified by their characteristic spectra, with the majority falling into three main groups: C-type, S-type, and M-type. These were named after and are generally identified with carbon-rich, stony, and metallic compositions, respectively.

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 3:11 am

OK WUWT I am allowed to post long comments on asteroids (from Wiki) but not on the subject of the post. Why is that?

eco-geek
August 16, 2011 3:27 am

Efforts to censor me posting on this topic are regularly made across the internet on this subject but I am surprised to see it happening on WUWT. Is WUWT in charge of its own comment system? It seems to be automated.
[Reply: the problem may be with WordPress, which uses an algorithm that places certain keyword comments in the spam folder. I’ve rescued your comments and posted them (except for your duplicate posts). Or, the problem could be with your computer. Have patience, it will all be worked out. ~dbs, mod.]

son of mulder
August 16, 2011 3:29 am

Fat people sweat more so give off more dihydrogen monoxide and so create even more climate disruption. That’s why there are so many more midges in Scotland and why it rains a lot there;>)

DJ
August 16, 2011 3:30 am

We are all hoping that there will this revelation will be included in AR5, in a new section who’s lead authors are Anthony Bourdain, Bobby Flay, and Guy Fieri.
THEN the IPCC will begin to regain some much needed credibility…even if it has nothing really to do with climate…unless that climate is a taco shack at a Caribbean beach… And instead of a Summary for Policy Makers, they’ll release a Recipes for Policy Makers, with a foreword by Al Gore.