Sure

why doesn't the other 97% of that flux affect the climate?

You are saying humans create 3% this number is really small so how can it create an increase in co2

But I’m saying

In the bucket case

why does the natural co2 flux not have a greater effect than human produced co2?

If the system is at equilibrium and you increase the flow by just 3% water in the bucket will increase

stop with the analogies

you are bad at them

Why is it a bad analogy it shows such a small percentage of 3 can fuck over an equilibrium system. Systems in the environment remove co2 and add co2 then humans come along then add 3% more carbon dioxide. Well guess what your equilibrium system is fucked. The water is going to rise. Just like we see co2 concentrations rise in the environment

It’s actually a great analogy in my opinion

if you can't accept that a bucket filled with water is a bad analogy for the Earth's atmosphere then you are either willfully ignorant or intellectually dishonest. I have no time for either.

No

I am not saying it’s the same as the earth atmosphere I am disputing your claim that is basically humans create 3% this number is small why would it effect the system as a whole

It’s kind of a beautiful analogy

it's not my claim that human produced co2 is 3% of annual flux. it is fact.

Yes

But you are saying this number is insignificant right?

compared to the 97% of natural annual flux. yes.

how is this hard?

Okay just like the bucket

3% flow of water increase seems insignificant

But

No. Stop. I can't take anymore buckets

In an equilibrium system 3% increase can fuck it over

what about the 97%?

The 97% is just flows out the hole.

do you understand what "annual flux" is?

Yup

Okay

So in the bucket situation you think increasing the input flow by 3% will cause nothing to happen because it’s an insignificant number? @oojimaflip

it's not a "bucket situation"

jeez

No answer the question

Will it

Or will it not

fuck the bucket. I'm done.

don't ping me again

Dude it’s just a simple hypothetical

if you really want to avoid a catastrophe; go talk to China and India, when they agree to forego their own industrial revolution in order to lower their co2 emissions to "sustainable" rates, then we can talk about *what more the west should do.*

since you haven't adequately answered any of my questions I'm going to refuse to entertain any of your naiive hypotheticals.