ROTFL. No Granny, the climate models have consistently predicted much MORE warming that has actually occurred over the last 30 years. Of course, alarmist propagandists believe in the "big lie" so they sometimes claim otherwise but it is complete nonsense. They also spend a lot of adjusting datasets to match their models instead of fixing their models which only means that we no longer have any useful data that can be uses as a real world comparison.
Ahh ... more propaganda-phile TimG nonsense ... but Tim ... real Tim ... also said this:
...the question of what to do since I agree that we know enough to justify some policy response to increasing CO2 emissions. ..What do we do Tim?
Tackle the biggest sources first, I'd say.
Canada has the highest emissions
per capita in the world. But that's a total divided by the number of people, and
individual people are not really a big source of our emissions: industries are.Past Canadian data on GHG emissions looked at different economic/industrial sectors, resulting in pitting sectors against each other.
I rather like this new report that, instead, looks at
buildings/facilities across all sectors:
Emissions from the reporting facilities account for 41% of Canada's total GHG emissionsThat's certainly a number worth addressing, for a fairly quick return on our efforts and money. It's accurately targeted at significant sources, doesn't pit sectors against each other, and I think we know quite a bit about reducing emissions of large facilities that just hasn't been implemented or prioritized for funding.
So I support the Green Party's platform that does just that.
No doubt some funding for these infrastructure improvements may come from reduced or reallocated subsidies to fossil fuel production, also Green policy, so perhaps additional GHG reductions there too.