EPA Chief concedes climate rule; it's about 'reinventing a global economy'

a reply to: angryhulk

No the debate is over. CO2 continues to rise and we keep burning that fuel that releases CO2.

You folks in denial just refuse to do the research and I will not waste my time linking previous threads that address the issue.

Anyone who truly wants to be enlightened by the very real CO2 problem can use ATS's search feature or google.

As I wrote before, there is no debate of where the excess CO2 is coming from. Anyone who tries to tell us otherwise is too lazy/stupid to figure it out or servants to the merchants of doubt.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

originally posted by: Greven
This 'CO2 is plant food' talking point is dumb.

Do you think plants are made of only carbon and oxygen?

There's a cute little animated movie called "The Lorax" based on the Dr. Seuss children's book. During one scene there's a debate over whether to plant a tree in the middle of town. The bad guy, Mr. O'Hare, who sells bottled air, is complaining about how useless trees are and the pro-tree girl replies they make clean air for free.

O'Hare: They do not!
Girl: Yes they do. It's called photosynthesis.
O'Hare: Photo... she's making that up! That's not a real word!

For some reason that movie came to mind... anyway...

CO2 is not just 'plant food' but it is also 'plant air.' Photosynthesis uses the instability of chlorine (why plants are green) to convert CO2 into oxygen and simple sugars used for growth in the presence of certain wavelengths of sunlight. We, along with other animal life, use the oxygen to fuel our chemical processes and release the resultant CO2. It's called symbiosis; each depends on the other.

Plant growth rates are a function of 3 variables: amount of sunlight (in the proper radiation band), temperature (within a certain range), and availability of CO2. Decrease any of these and growth rates will decrease; increase them and growth rates will increase. Greenhouse operators have known and used this information for a very long time.

Plants do not have to be made solely of carbon and oxygen for this to be true. What you have done in this post is try to disprove a scientific theory which has existed for centuries on the basis of a completely unrelated scientific observation. That is in itself unscientific. It's like saying the speed of light is not constant because your house is painted blue.

Incidentally, I do not believe "dumb" is a scientific term either...

TheRedneck

That's cute.

I've lived my whole life in Oklahoma. My parents farmed when they were younger and still garden. My grandparents farmed and the ones that still live still garden. I've helped a bit myself, when I was younger. I did research in college in botany-oriented biology projects. Some of the people I worked with literally discovered ways to make plants grow in different ways.

Yet, you want to lecture me about this. Go on, keep telling me stuff you read on the internet, but answer me this:
What is fertilizer made of, and does it influence plant growth?

a reply to: _damon

I will end it by saying: did it ever occur to you that you didnt need science to tell you the sun shines light and warmth upon Earth?

Oh wow... yes that does say a lot. Thank you for that enlightenment of truth!
Its funny that you want to bring up the monkeys in this, especially when you preface this by saying you don't want to say why you think what you think... It is almost like you are not sure why you are not suppose to grab the banana, you just know you shouldn't.

a reply to: Greven

What is fertilizer made of, and does it influence plant growth?

Huh, why does not one want to answer this question?

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: Greven

This 'CO2 is plant food' talking point is dumb.

Do you think plants are made of only carbon and oxygen?

LOL... Obviously you have no idea that all lifeforms on Earth are carbon based...

Carbon forms the key component for all known life on Earth. Complex molecules are made up of carbon bonded with other elements, especially oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen, and carbon is able to bond with all of these because of its four valence electrons. Carbon is abundant on earth. It is also lightweight and relatively small in size, making it easier for enzymes to manipulate carbon molecules.[citation needed] It is often[how often?] assumed in astrobiology that if life exists somewhere else in the universe, it will also be carbon based.[1][2] Critics refer to this assumption as carbon chauvinism.
...

en.wikipedia.org...

Some people really need to brush up on their "science"...

So if you're in a closed garage with your car running, you'll be just fine?

a reply to: Greven

Oh, it's on the web, I'm sure. It's also taught in third-grade science class.

I'm glad to hear your family gardens. It's very rewarding and much more nutritious than the processed food substitutes you can buy.

Fertilizer is made of many things. Commercially, it usually contains nitrogen (in ammonia), phosphorous compounds, and potassium compounds, along with several other nutrients including a few metallic compounds. Thank God above we learned to make commercial fertilizer so plant growth on earth was possible... oh, wait, plant growth existed before fertilizer, didn't it? And people used manure for fertilizer. Thank God above we learned to do that so plant life could be possible on earth... oh, wait, plants grow where humans have never lived.

All soil contains nutrients which are used in life processes for various reactions. We fertilize to replentish those nutrients as they are used up. One of those metallic compounds is copper. Are plants made of copper? Do you want 24 gage wire in your salad?

Your premise is unfounded. The fact that a plant is not 100% hydrocarbons does not negate the effect of carbon dioxide in photosynthesis, nor does it disprove photosynthesis. It only casts doubt on your ability to logically make conclusions based on scientific information.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Phage

You probably should have replied in that thread.

Don't worry, it was my full intention to do so.

originally posted by: Phage

But tell me, what is the current field strength?

Oh, I see, so you are going to try to use "averages now"?... So I guess there are no areas that are being affected more than others by "climate change"?

It's also probably just a coincidence that one of the areas in which Earth's magnetic field is weakening more than others happens to be the Pacific, and the "El Niño" happens to have gathered strength in 2016 and has become a "super-El Niño". The same event which you have tried to claim has been worsened by AGW was more probably worsened by the Earth's magnetic field weakening 10 times faster over areas such as the Pacific.

originally posted by: Greven
So if you're in a closed garage with your car running, you'll be just fine?

As long as it puts out carbon DIOXIDE instead of carbon MONOXIDE, yes, you'll be fine.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Sremmos80

I learnt to connect the dots, you didnt. End of the story. But keep comforting yourself. It doesnt matter in the end.

All the proofs are out there. Stop expecting everyone to enlighten you, you dont deserve it. I mean, if you find comfort in believing obvious lies, why in the hell would anyone in the known want to waste his energy with you? No pain no gain. Dont wanna expand your tiny bubble? Fine its not like you're alone, the cognitive dissonance is shared by billions so enjoy being part of it.. i guess?

originally posted by: Greven

So if you're in a closed garage with your car running, you'll be just fine?

Do you have any idea how much CO2 levels would have to increase for that to happen globally?...

To put in context... That room you are in with the AC on, or the heater on has an average 1,000ppm of atmospheric CO2 in your house/room. Are you dead? Are your plants dead?... Are your pets dead?...

Even if globally CO2 levels were to double, they still wouldn't reach 1,000ppm...

CO2 would have to reach 7%-10% of your ambient air in order for you to die... Right now Earth has about 0.04% atmospheric CO2...

The only types of events that would increase atmospheric CO2 globally to 7%-10% would be massive volcanic eruptions, and a large meteor strike. But a meteor strike so large would fry you first and everyone else on Earth so you wouldn't have to worry about running out of oxygen, and such large volcanic eruptions and a large meteor strike would also cover the Earth with a blanket of dust that would not allow the Sun to enter Earth's atmosphere, so either way if such an event were to occur you and every living thing on this planet would die. The only animals, and humans that would survive are those that would seek shelter in caves deep under the Earth which have enough oxygen to last years. Other than that just some microbes, and cockroaches would survive.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Rather than my responding here. Please repost in the appropriate thread.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: TheRedneck

As long as it puts out carbon DIOXIDE instead of carbon MONOXIDE, yes, you'll be fine.

Actually, no. You won't. CO2 kills.

The eventual number of people who died in the Lake Nyos gas leak was put at more than 1,700.

Scientists debated the cause of the disaster for some time afterwards.

It was finally concluded that the lake's lower levels had become saturated by carbon dioxide gas (CO2) due to gaseous springs which bubbled up from the extinct volcano beneath.

news.bbc.co.uk...

a reply to: DBCowboy

Eliminate all electricity & fossil fuels. Oh & all humans.

originally posted by: Phage

Actually, no. You won't. CO2 kills.

Too much water also kills, I guess you better start protesting for all that evil water that surrounds the entire planet... It can kill EVERYONE!!!

a reply to: ElectricUniverse
Indeed. But this was the claim:

As long as it puts out carbon DIOXIDE instead of carbon MONOXIDE, yes, you'll be fine.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Phage

From your link, news.bbc.co.uk...

A doctor there said they had been poisoned by a mixture of gases including hydrogen and sulphur.

He described the symptoms, including burning pains in the eyes and nose, coughing and signs of asphyxiation similar to strangulation, as like being gassed by a kitchen stove.

Those are not symptoms of CO2 poisoning. chemistry.about.com...

deeper breathing
twitching of muscles
increased blood pressure
headache
increased pulse rate
loss of judgement
labored breathing
unconsciousness (occurs in under a minute when CO2 concentration rises about 10%)
death

Please do a little research before challenging something this this. You can instill panic in those uninformed about the subject... like the IPCC likes to do.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Please do a little research before challenging something this this.

So. Preliminary guesses are preferable to further analysis? It's entirely likely that hydrogen sulfide was involved. But that's ok, go ahead and fill your garage with CO2, you'll be fine.

Again, from that same link:

It was finally concluded that the lake's lower levels had become saturated by carbon dioxide gas (CO2) due to gaseous springs which bubbled up from the extinct volcano beneath.

a reply to: Phage

And he is right as well, during such natural gas leaks, and even man-made leaks it isn't just CO2 that is released, and normally is carbon monoxide or a combination of different gases that kills.

You are the one who made the sweeping remark that CO2 kills... It doesn't, not at the levels they exist in Earth's atmosphere, and if you are going to say "CO2 kills" then you can also make another sweeping claim that "water kills"...

The problem is Humans need about 20% oxygen to survive, ANY GAS that replaces oxygen and increases more than oxygen will kill you. Just like if water was to fill your room it would kill you.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

You are the one who made the sweeping remark that CO2 kills... It doesn't, not at the levels they exist in Earth's atmosphere, and if you are going to say "CO2 kills" then you can also make another sweeping claim that "water kills"...

Ok, you to can run your only CO2 producing car in your garage as the previous poster suggested. "You'll be fine."

originally posted by: Phage

Ok, you to can run your only CO2 producing car in your garage as the previous poster suggested. "You'll be fine."

Ok, you can fill your garage with water, with you in it, and "you'll be fine Phage"... Go ahead, and try it...