Do you think that Trumps EPA Czar Scott Pruitt will know how much CO2 is in the atmosphere?

The EPA is a big bureaucratic mess, which urgently needs sorting out and Pruitt seems just the man to do it.

They go on about CO2 (which is not a pollutant, it is essential for all life on Earth) while causing mercury spills, and allowing lead contaminated drinking water as well as many other problems.

I was more concerned that Trump would listen to an air head like Evanka who believes the pap that is CAGW. I really don't care what Pruitt's background is as long as he begins to dismantle much of the stifling regulation coming out of the EPA. I don't like unaccountable bureaucrats with so much power.

It really has absolutely nothing to do with "how much" is in the air. At current levels it is hardly a temperature forcing. One has to understand the part of the atmosphere that is in question and GLOBAL ALARMISTS are more worried about "Global average surface temperature". We know this because they continue to use surface temperature measurements as proof of Global Warming.

There are 2 major greenhouse gases. Water vapor and CO2.

Above surface water vapor can only form in temperatures above 0C (or 32F). This rarely happens above the surface in Antarctica and happens a bit more frequently in the Arctic. More frequency in the Arctic is due to the difference in land masses between the hemispheres (Northern and Southern).

The hydro-cycle is the most important part of Earth's greenhouse effect! As long as we continue to have consistent hydro-cycles, then CO2 remains a very, very, very small player in Earth's climatic flow.

" ... The greenhouse effect requires the understanding of two effects: first, the temperature of a heated object in a vacuum, and second, the adiabatic lapse rate in a convective atmosphere.

For the first, you need to know that the hotter the surface of an object is, the faster it radiates heat. This acts as a sort of feedback control, so that if the temperature falls below the equilibrium level it radiates less heat than it absorbs and hence heats up, and if the temperature rises above the equilibrium it radiates more heat than it is absorbing and hence cools down. The average radiative temperature for the Earth is easily calculated to be about -20 C, which is close enough although a proper calculation taking non-uniformities into account would be more complicated.

However, the critical point of the above is the question of what “surface” we are talking about. The surface that radiates heat to space is not the solid surface of the Earth. If you could see in infra-red, the atmosphere would be a fuzzy opaque mist, and the surface you could see would actually be high up in the atmosphere. It is this surface that approaches the equilibrium temperature by radiation to space. Emission occurs from all altitudes from the ground up to about 10 km, but the average is at about 5 km.

The second thing you need to know doesn’t involve radiation or greenhouse gases at all. It is a simply physical property of gases, that if you compress them they get hot, and if you allow them to expand they cool down. As air rises in the atmosphere due to convection the pressure drops and hence so does its temperature. As it descends again it is compressed and its temperature rises. The temperature changes are not due to the flow of heat in to or out of the air; they are due to the conversion of potential energy as air rises and falls in a gravitational field. ... "

If he has read this, then he understands "how much" CO2 in our atmosphere is currently irrelevant.

" ... This sets up a constant temperature gradient in the atmosphere. The surface is at about 15 C on average, and as you climb the temperature drops at a constant rate until you reach the top of the troposphere where it has dropped to a chilly -54 C. Anyone who flies planes will know this as the standard atmosphere.

Basic properties of gases would mean that dry air would change temperature by about 10 C/km change in altitude. This is modified somewhat by the latent heat of water vapour, which reduces it to about 6 C/km.

And if you multiply 6 C/km by 5 km between the layer at equilibrium temperature and the surface, you get the 30 C greenhouse effect. ... "

" ... Our basic understanding of the underlying physics of the atmospheric greenhouse effect does not direct translate into quantitative understanding of the sensitivity of the Earth’s energy balance to doubling CO2, which remains a topic of substantial debate and ongoing research.  And it does not say anything about other processes that cause climate change, such as solar and the internal ocean oscillations. ... "

(I'll give the ALARMISTS (aka "Climate Clowns") time to digest the quote before I divulge the person(s) who actually said it.)

Everyone with half a brain knows that trump is a devil and that he will destroy the earth.

We are all going to die.

That is a FACT!!

Why? Is it a requirement for heading up the EPA?

It wasn't always so:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvvhVXYMN78

Ho hum, more brainwashed stupidity from corrupt socialists.

Your gravy train is about to be derailed, parasite.

NYT fake news