Because of Christianity, there was a need to have the Renaissance to begin with. The time was not called dark age because it was great. What an odd way to look at history.

Extremely progressive religions… Sounds like a contraction to me.

Moiety? Motif? Never heard of these things in this context. Why not just compound or structure? Good post otherwise.

Why do you think pyrolyzing random plastic waste generates biochar?

It would also never be carbon negative, since it is from oil. Best case is neutral, but some carbon is burned off in the process.

Same for concrete, it is not suddenly carbon negative.

I don’t see how this answers my question.

Ah yes, that is indeed the case.

No, it does not imply Natural causes. There is zero (implied or explicit) information as to why the change is happening. It is merely stating a fact.

The last 20 years saw increased in emissions, but not the the way you claim. see this chart 1990 22 billion t CO2 2003 27.7 billion t CO2 2023 35? 36? Billion t CO2

Even more importantly you can check how the shares of emissions change: Here on this page. 20 years ago the regional emission shares were essentially the same. 30 years ago too. Pretty much only China got really bigger, EU and USA are fairly constant in that time, even tho they moved things like steel production to China.

You are actually incorrect. Of course there are massive spikes like when a meteor hits or a super volcano erupts. But A that is not relevant. And B records can not show this, they don’t have the chronological resolution to do that. Kind of the same way you can not measure the growth of hair over one day with a ruler, it is not possible. But over dozens of days it is possible. But how could you then tell if the hair grew much at one day and little on others? Your can’t.

What do you mean 1% nearly broke the EU?