Global warming - an urgent problem requiring radical solution (no politics or religion)

My own personal opinion is that these threads are boring. You guys had to keep doing this thing where all the people who disagree with you aren't smart enough to understand a word about the subject they're bashing.

Just because plants consume co2 does not mean they will all do better with more of it in the atmosphere. 

http://theconversation.com/will-rising-carbon-dioxide-levels-really-boost-plant-growth-95265

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/sep/19/new-study-undercuts-favorite-climate-myth-more-co2-is-good-for-plants

I think the point is that just allowing more and more co2 into the atmosphere will cause changes that are potentially harmful. As there are alternatives to fossil fuels it seems prudent to adopt them. 

People have to accept scientific orthodoxy OR attack it from a position of understanding. You cannot argue with scientists unless you understand what they are talking about. Its like if I watched a chess game by Magnus Carlsen. Lets say its a game he won convincingly. I could agree with his moves and understand some of the logic in his play with the little understanding I have of chess. But if I wanted to disagree with a strategy he used and say it was flawed - I would need a very thorough understanding of the game to be able to prove my point. 

Coal plants

It is more than possible: coal originates from ancient plants which include ancient trees. (It is worth noting though that when coal was formed, modern trees had not evolved).

The coal that humans could consume in a few centuries (if it was not disastrous to do so) took many millions of years to form.

 Good question: crops do vary quite a lot. Unfortunately, none is efficient enough at using sunlight to cope with a large fraction of the CO2 humans produce from burning fossil fuels.

Why was most of the Earth's coal made all at once? | Ars Technica

Planting a victory garden is a good idea.

One zucchini plant is plenty.

1. ice age. 2. volcanos and dinosaurs and stuff. 3. people were saying the earth was getting cooler. 4. now

Presumably you are summarising a five year old's view of history?

It is interesting to ponder on why we should be convinced about facts about the past. Being scientific helps a lot!

Certain things are beyond opinion once they have been proved correct. For example it is a fact that the Earth is roughly spherical. It is not flat. That is not an opinion; it's a fact. 

What I said was that "it helps your opinion" for it to be based on sound scientific reasoning.

No, it helps it to be right. If you don't know why, you need to study the scientific method and inference.

Anyhow, more on topic, Australian researchers have made crucial advances that make hydrogen-powered vehicles practical (previously, the problem has been storing the hydrogen: the key is to store ammonia, which is much easier, and generate the hydrogen on the fly using the technique they have developed).

That reminds me of a famous comment from the late, great, and greatly missed John Peel:

You're entitled to your opinion, of course you are. But I'm still right.

It's almost as if you have forgotten that the discussion has dealt with storing solar energy as hydrogen or ammonia for easier transportation. Hydrogen was used in Saturn V for a reason.

I am honoured by the comparison.

I just meant that the scientific method helps scientific conclusions to be right, though.