Earth's Plant Life 'Recycles' Carbon Dioxide Faster Than Previously Estimated (25%)

Measuring Global Photosynthesis Rate: Earth's Plant Life 'Recycles' Carbon Dioxide Faster Than Previously Estimated
www.sciencedaily.com...

A Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego-led research team followed the path of oxygen atoms on carbon dioxide molecules during photosynthesis to create a new way of measuring the efficiency of the world's plant life.

A team led by postdoctoral researcher Lisa Welp considered the oxygen atoms contained in the carbon dioxide taken up by plants during photosynthesis. The ratio of two oxygen isotopes in carbon dioxide told researchers how long the CO2 had been in the atmosphere and how fast it had passed through plants. From this, they estimated that the global rate of photosynthesis is about 25 percent faster than thought.

Anyone surprised?

I don't have much to personally comment on the article, however I am sure there are many on the boards here who will find this interesting.

Enjoy, and I am looking forward to any comments or implications this may lead to.

So plants use up consiberaby more CO2 than previously thought (ie, "in the existing models").

And NASA discovered that a lot more CO2 escapes the atmosphere than previously thought (ie, "in the existing models")

And CERN discovered that climate change is much more affected by solar and space activity than previously thought (ie, "in the existing models")

Rather than put a gag rule on the most respected scientists in the world, and get a journal editor fired for publishing the study (both incidents related to CERN), why don't we update "the existing models"?

Perhaps because there is too much money in cap and trade scams? Or because fear is the best way to gain control over people?

Bet the UN "scientists" poopoo this study, too.

but, but, but....all the current climatologists say anthropomorphic global warming is real! Wow, so the profession that survives by grants and funding connected to global warming push the theory. Well that's a surprise.

If you believed Einstein early in his career, you were considered a quack. If you believed quantum theory when it came out, Einstein would've called you a quack.

Was the little renaissance of the 12th century proof that humans create global warming(A documented warming period in human history)? If so, how did they do it without industrial technology?
And how did they cool things down for the "little ice age" of the 17th-18th centuries?

This seems to be more and more a clear example of the dogma and religious devotion espoused by many scientists. Unlike political and actual religious devotion, however, science tends to make the changes within a generation or so as the facts become laid bare and scientists who aren't religiously devoted to their own theories come of age.

I have a feeling this will be one of those instances where science will change its mind. In fact, it seems to be already doing so. It's the politics and economics of "climate change" that will take longer to get rid of.

This article brought to mind the discovery last year that the basis of carbon 14 dating - that radioactive decay rates remain constant and always have been constant - has come into question because decay rate changes are becoming apparent.

news.discovery.com...

Improved measurements or dynamic and changing world - maybe both. The one constant is change.

All I know is when I drive to work in the morning there is a brown stripe of pollution hanging over the city skyline and I think "oh man, I'm going to be breathing that in about half an hour". Global warming aside, we're killing ourselves with all this disgusting pollution on a local scale. Upper respiratory problems are rampant and frequently get blamed on allergies, but I suspect we have pollution to blame. We're so busy arguing about climate change that the very real health problems related to pollution have been completely sidelined. We really need to reign this in.

Before people start going on about how climate change is fake remember using up the earth’s natural resources is not. Whether we are warming up the climate is a sketchy debate but we are still polluting and expending precious resources.

reply to post by OwenGP185


Your only solutions are deal with it or kill off the vast majority of the global population.