CO₂ is not a pollutant

I absolutely agree.

But which AGW supporter says CO₂ is a pollutant?

Come on, Chris Martz, which reputable scientific authority says CO₂ is a pollutant?

There are health hazards with CO₂ levels much higher than atmospheric levels are now, but those relate to levels indoors and are nothing to do with AGW which is driven by atmospheric levels.

CO₂ levels are nowhere near where they have been

That is true.

But when talking about Earth's history bear in mind that homo sapiens has only existed for a tiny part - the most recent part - of that history.

And before home sapiens evolved life forms came and went as environmental conditions varied over millions of years, and whole species went extinct for a variety of reasons.

What matters to us now is how conditions are now, not how they were millions of years ago.

CO₂ levels are higher now than they were at the time of the last glaciation

CO₂ levels now are at the highest level they have been during the existence of homo sapiens, and they are rising.

What is the correct level of CO₂

What?

Does Chris Martz not know what the ideal level is?

If he doesn't, why didn't he do some research - there's plenty of material available.

Most authorities put the ideal level at about 350ppm.

Here are some links:

• What is the ideal level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere for human life?
• Target atmospheric CO₂: Where should humanity aim?
• Climate change targets: 350 ppm and the EU two-degree target

 

Anybody would think you believe AGW supporters want the level to be as low as 180.

We don't.

350ppm would be fine.

So, what about the greenhouse effect?

Chris Martz just ignores the greenhouse effect.

Why?

The greenhouse effect is the problem, not any "toxicity" of CO₂.