Denitrification and Climate Change: Cause OR Effect?

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > Denitrification and Climate Change: Cause OR Effect?

Denitrification and Climate Change: Cause OR Effect?26-06-2026 18:57
sealover ★★★★★ (2123)	Does denitrification cause climate change? Does climate change cause denitrification? YES to both questions, in more ways than one. Because there is more than one kind of "denitrification". Some words are not limited to single meaning in every context. Stratospheric denitrification, a physical process occurring many kilometers above the Earth's surface, is very different than the biochemical process of denitrification that occurs under low oxygen conditions in soil and water. Stratospheric denitrification is caused by climate change. The stratosphere is colder now than it was during most of the 20th century. In the dead of winter over the poles, the stratosphere now gets cold enough for nitric acid, HNO3, to condense into droplets to form polar stratospheric clouds. At times it gets so cold that droplets of liquid nitric acid freeze into solid crystals of nitric acid ice. These HNO3 crystals fall down (precipitate) from the stratosphere in a process they call stratospheric denitrification. This didn't happen when we had a warmer stratosphere, until the 1990s. There is much to be discussed about the consequences of stratospheric denitrification, with opposing schools of thought, and confounding evidence. In one model, ozone-damaging products of our CFCs (freon, etc.) and other ozone destroying agents get sequestered into those polar stratospheric cloud droplets, and upon precipitation when they freeze into ice crystals are removed to where they can do no harm to the ozone. In another model, the presence of nitric acid ice crystals provides a surface to adsorb ozone-destroying agents and hold them steady in place for repeated destruction of passing ozone molecules. Did stratospheric denitrification save the ozone layer from our CFCs? Is stratospheric denitrification the biggest threat to the ozone layer since CFCs? Denitrification in soil and water causes climate change. Microbial denitrification in soil and water, on the other hand. The nitrous oxide, N2O by product of the biochemical process is a greenhouse gas 200-300 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, CO2, gram per gram or molecule per molecule. Under low oxygen conditions, denitrifying bacteria use nitrate, NO3- as a terminal electron acceptor to oxidize organic carbon for metabolic energy. The organic carbon is oxidized to carbonate ion, CO3(2-), and the nitrate is reduced to dinitrogen gas, N2. A very small percentage of by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO is produced. Microbial denitrification is by far the largest source of nitrous oxide emission to the atmosphere. When this occurs as a direct result of our application of nitrogen fertilizer, those nitrous oxide emissions can be characterized as "anthropogenic". If human activity is responsible for global warming, then there is another HUGE "anthropogenic" source of nitrous oxide emissions from ecosystem disturbances such as the thawing of permafrost as tundra shifts to taiga, or the generally accelerated decomposition of soil organic matter globally. Microbial nitrate reduction is the biggest source and accounts for the lion's share of global nitrous oxide emissions. But denitrification isn't the only contributor. Another pathway of nitrate reduction is being increasingly recognized as a major source of nitrous oxide emission. Denitrification is "dissimilatory" nitrate reduction, because the bacteria do not assimilate the nitrogen as a nutrient. They just use it as oxidant for organic carbon. Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium (DNRA) is another way that bacteria oxidize organic carbon under low oxygen conditions. Unlike denitrification, DNRA transform nitrate into ammonium, NH4+, which can be held in the soil on cation exchange sites. Like denitrification, DNRA makes carbonate ions, CO3(2-) as the oxidized carbon waste product, and produces by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO. So, denitrification versus denitrification. Cause or effect of climate change? Yes.
26-06-2026 20:07
sealover ★★★★★ (2123)	Does denitrification cause climate change? Does climate change cause denitrification? YES to both questions, in more ways than one. Because there is more than one kind of "denitrification". Some words are not limited to single meaning in every context. Stratospheric denitrification, a physical process occurring many kilometers above the Earth's surface, is very different than the biochemical process of denitrification that occurs under low oxygen conditions in soil and water. Stratospheric denitrification is caused by climate change. The stratosphere is colder now than it was during most of the 20th century. In the dead of winter over the poles, the stratosphere now gets cold enough for nitric acid, HNO3, to condense into droplets to form polar stratospheric clouds. At times it gets so cold that droplets of liquid nitric acid freeze into solid crystals of nitric acid ice. These HNO3 crystals fall down (precipitate) from the stratosphere in a process they call stratospheric denitrification. This didn't happen when we had a warmer stratosphere, until the 1990s. There is much to be discussed about the consequences of stratospheric denitrification, with opposing schools of thought, and confounding evidence. In one model, ozone-damaging products of our CFCs (freon, etc.) and other ozone destroying agents get sequestered into those polar stratospheric cloud droplets, and upon precipitation when they freeze into ice crystals are removed to where they can do no harm to the ozone. In another model, the presence of nitric acid ice crystals provides a surface to adsorb ozone-destroying agents and hold them steady in place for repeated destruction of passing ozone molecules. Did stratospheric denitrification save the ozone layer from our CFCs? Is stratospheric denitrification the biggest threat to the ozone layer since CFCs? Denitrification in soil and water causes climate change. Microbial denitrification in soil and water, on the other hand. The nitrous oxide, N2O by product of the biochemical process is a greenhouse gas 200-300 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, CO2, gram per gram or molecule per molecule. Under low oxygen conditions, denitrifying bacteria use nitrate, NO3- as a terminal electron acceptor to oxidize organic carbon for metabolic energy. The organic carbon is oxidized to carbonate ion, CO3(2-), and the nitrate is reduced to dinitrogen gas, N2. A very small percentage of by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO is produced. Microbial denitrification is by far the largest source of nitrous oxide emission to the atmosphere. When this occurs as a direct result of our application of nitrogen fertilizer, those nitrous oxide emissions can be characterized as "anthropogenic". If human activity is responsible for global warming, then there is another HUGE "anthropogenic" source of nitrous oxide emissions from ecosystem disturbances such as the thawing of permafrost as tundra shifts to taiga, or the generally accelerated decomposition of soil organic matter globally. Microbial nitrate reduction is the biggest source and accounts for the lion's share of global nitrous oxide emissions. But denitrification isn't the only contributor. Another pathway of nitrate reduction is being increasingly recognized as a major source of nitrous oxide emission. Denitrification is "dissimilatory" nitrate reduction, because the bacteria do not assimilate the nitrogen as a nutrient. They just use it as oxidant for organic carbon. Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium (DNRA) is another way that bacteria oxidize organic carbon under low oxygen conditions. Unlike denitrification, DNRA transform nitrate into ammonium, NH4+, which can be held in the soil on cation exchange sites. Like denitrification, DNRA makes carbonate ions, CO3(2-) as the oxidized carbon waste product, and produces by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO. So, denitrification versus denitrification. Cause or effect of climate change? Yes.
26-06-2026 21:50
IBdaMann★★★★★ (15313)	sealover wrote: Does denitrification cause undefined bzzyrbizwithy byrrithial? Does undefined bzzyrbizwithy byrrithial cause denitrification ? YES to both questions, in more ways than one. Your gibberish is worthy of your "library". sealover wrote:Because there is more than one flavor of "denitrification". I imagine there is plain old vanilla, and chocolate, and strawberry, and maybe cherry? sealover wrote: Some words are not limited to single meaning in every context. Well isn't that profound? sealover wrote: Stratospheric denitrification, a physical process occurring many kilometers above the Earth's surface, is very different than (way too funny) the biochemical process of denitrification that occurs under low oxygen conditions in soil and water. Of course, just as two imaginary leprechauns are night and day in comparison. Have I mentioned lately that your religion is stupid? sealover wrote: The stratosphere is colder now than it was during most of the 20th century. That began occurring when thermodynamics got inadvertently turned off. sealover wrote: In the dead of winter over the poles, Who are winter's dead? sealover wrote: the stratosphere now gets cold enough for violations of physics to occur whenever necessary. [quote]sealover wrote: This didn't happen when we had a warmer stratosphere, until the 1990s. Who constitutes "we"? I hope you aren't trying to slide me and my stratosphere into that mess. sealover wrote: There is much to be discussed about the consequences of stratospheric denitrification ... but nothing real. sealover wrote: In one model There are no models. sealover wrote: ozone-damaging products of our CFCs (freon, etc.) and other ozone destroying agents get sequestered into those polar stratospheric cloud droplets, Nope. You are simply confusing the stratosphere with the troposphere like the non-scientist you are. You are gullible. sealover wrote: The nitrous oxide, N2O by product of the biochemical process is a greenhouse gas There is no such thing as greenhouse effect and hence there is no such thing as greenhouse gas. sealover wrote: 200-300 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, What do you mean "more powerful." This is where you get to show some science aptitude and explain in what way N20 is more "powerful" than Co2, as you assert. I'm going to add this to the list of your outstanding questions.
26-06-2026 23:58
Im a BM ★★★★★ (3712)	IBdaMann wrote: sealover wrote: Does denitrification cause undefined bzzyrbizwithy byrrithial? Does undefined bzzyrbizwithy byrrithial cause denitrification ? YES to both questions, in more ways than one. Your gibberish is worthy of your "library". sealover wrote:Because there is more than one flavor of "denitrification". I imagine there is plain old vanilla, and chocolate, and strawberry, and maybe cherry? sealover wrote: Some words are not limited to single meaning in every context. Well isn't that profound? sealover wrote: Stratospheric denitrification, a physical process occurring many kilometers above the Earth's surface, is very different than (way too funny) the biochemical process of denitrification that occurs under low oxygen conditions in soil and water. Of course, just as two imaginary leprechauns are night and day in comparison. Have I mentioned lately that your religion is stupid? sealover wrote: The stratosphere is colder now than it was during most of the 20th century. That began occurring when thermodynamics got inadvertently turned off. sealover wrote: In the dead of winter over the poles, Who are winter's dead? sealover wrote: the stratosphere now gets cold enough for violations of physics to occur whenever necessary. [quote]sealover wrote: This didn't happen when we had a warmer stratosphere, until the 1990s. Who constitutes "we"? I hope you aren't trying to slide me and my stratosphere into that mess. sealover wrote: There is much to be discussed about the consequences of stratospheric denitrification ... but nothing real. sealover wrote: In one model There are no models. sealover wrote: ozone-damaging products of our CFCs (freon, etc.) and other ozone destroying agents get sequestered into those polar stratospheric cloud droplets, Nope. You are simply confusing the stratosphere with the troposphere like the non-scientist you are. You are gullible. sealover wrote: The nitrous oxide, N2O by product of the biochemical process is a greenhouse gas There is no such thing as greenhouse effect and hence there is no such thing as greenhouse gas. sealover wrote: 200-300 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, What do you mean "more powerful." This is where you get to show some science aptitude and explain in what way N20 is more "powerful" than Co2, as you assert. I'm going to add this to the list of your outstanding questions. You could "win" the scientific "debate" much more rapidly if you simply repeat Into the Night's Royal Decree, "There is no such thing as 'denitrification'." Just wish the whole thing away so you don't have to embarrass yourself with a bungled explanation about a scientific term you just got your very first superficial introduction to. Into the Night has already insisted that "there is no such thing as denitrification" over and over and over. Are you calling Into the Night a LIAR? I know that I'm calling Into the Night a liar. The closest IBdaMann comes to displaying any comprehension of what denitrification IS (provided that there even IS "such a thing") is the reference to "two imaginary leprechauns". Everyone becomes MORE STUPID by reading comments by these two scientifically illiterate moron TROLLS. Just add "denitrification" to the list of common scientific terms that are really just meaningless "buzzwords", because Internet trolls have declared that "there is no such thing" You don't even get to DEFINE YOUR TERMS if you're going to post bullshit buzzwords like "denitrification".
27-06-2026 01:16
Into the Night★★★★★ (24251)	Im a BM wrote: You could "win" the scientific "debate" much more rapidly if you simply repeat Into the Night's Royal Decree, "There is no such thing as 'denitrification'." Science isn't a debate. Contextomy fallacy. Im a BM wrote: Just wish the whole thing away so you don't have to embarrass yourself with a bungled explanation about a scientific term you just got your very first superficial introduction to. Buzzword fallacies. Science is not buzzwords. Science is not word games. Im a BM wrote: Into the Night has already insisted that "there is no such thing as denitrification" over and over and over. Contextomy fallacy. Im a BM wrote: Are you calling Into the Night a LIAR? I know that I'm calliig Into the Night a liar. Mantra 1a. Lame. Argument of the Stone fallacy. Bulverism fallacy. Im a BM wrote: The closest IBdaMann comes to displaying any comprehension of what denitrification IS (provided that there even IS "such a thing") is the reference to "two imaginary leprechauns". Contextomy fallacy. Im a BM wrote: Everyone becomes MORE STUPID by reading comments by these two scientifically illiterate moron TROLLS. Inversion fallacy. Im a BM wrote: Just add "denitrification" to the list of common scientific terms that are really just meaningless "buzzwords", because Internet trolls have declared that "there is no such thing" Contextomy fallacy. Im a BM wrote: You don't even get to DEFINE YOUR TERMS if you're going to post bullshit buzzwords like "denitrification". Inversion fallacy. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
27-06-2026 02:25
IBdaMann★★★★★ (15313)	Im a BM wrote: You could "win" the scientific "debate" much more rapidly if you simply repeat Into the Night's Royal Decree, "There is no such thing as 'denitrification'." You can't win anything involving Climate Change until you unambiguously define the global climate in a way that doesn't violate physics, math, logic and economics. Until then, there is no debate, nor is there even a conversation. You are simply dismissed. In the meantime, just wish yourself out of the hole you dug for yourself in the corner into which you backed yourself. Im a BM wrote: Everyone becomes MORE STUPID by reading comments by these two scientifically illiterate moron TROLLS. ... says the moron who refers to tropospheric ozone decomposition as physically impossible stratospheric ozone depletion. Im a BM wrote:Just add "denitrification" to the list of common scientific terms that are really just meaningless "buzzwords" OK, because you requested it. Get your atmospheric layers straight.
28-06-2026 17:28
sealover ★★★★★ (2123)	Does denitrification cause climate change? Does climate change cause denitrification? YES to both questions, in more ways than one. Because there is more than one kind of "denitrification". Some words are not limited to single meaning in every context. Stratospheric denitrification, a physical process occurring many kilometers above the Earth's surface, is very different than the biochemical process of denitrification that occurs under low oxygen conditions in soil and water. Stratospheric denitrification is caused by climate change. The stratosphere is colder now than it was during most of the 20th century. In the dead of winter over the poles, the stratosphere now gets cold enough for nitric acid, HNO3, to condense into droplets to form polar stratospheric clouds. At times it gets so cold that droplets of liquid nitric acid freeze into solid crystals of nitric acid ice. These HNO3 crystals fall down (precipitate) from the stratosphere in a process they call stratospheric denitrification. This didn't happen when we had a warmer stratosphere, until the 1990s. There is much to be discussed about the consequences of stratospheric denitrification, with opposing schools of thought, and confounding evidence. In one model, ozone-damaging products of our CFCs (freon, etc.) and other ozone destroying agents get sequestered into those polar stratospheric cloud droplets, and upon precipitation when they freeze into ice crystals are removed to where they can do no harm to the ozone. In another model, the presence of nitric acid ice crystals provides a surface to adsorb ozone-destroying agents and hold them steady in place for repeated destruction of passing ozone molecules. Did stratospheric denitrification save the ozone layer from our CFCs? Is stratospheric denitrification the biggest threat to the ozone layer since CFCs? Denitrification in soil and water causes climate change. Microbial denitrification in soil and water, on the other hand. The nitrous oxide, N2O by product of the biochemical process is a greenhouse gas 200-300 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, CO2, gram per gram or molecule per molecule. Under low oxygen conditions, denitrifying bacteria use nitrate, NO3- as a terminal electron acceptor to oxidize organic carbon for metabolic energy. The organic carbon is oxidized to carbonate ion, CO3(2-), and the nitrate is reduced to dinitrogen gas, N2. A very small percentage of by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO is produced. Microbial denitrification is by far the largest source of nitrous oxide emission to the atmosphere. When this occurs as a direct result of our application of nitrogen fertilizer, those nitrous oxide emissions can be characterized as "anthropogenic". If human activity is responsible for global warming, then there is another HUGE "anthropogenic" source of nitrous oxide emissions from ecosystem disturbances such as the thawing of permafrost as tundra shifts to taiga, or the generally accelerated decomposition of soil organic matter globally. Microbial nitrate reduction is the biggest source and accounts for the lion's share of global nitrous oxide emissions. But denitrification isn't the only contributor. Another pathway of nitrate reduction is being increasingly recognized as a major source of nitrous oxide emission. Denitrification is "dissimilatory" nitrate reduction, because the bacteria do not assimilate the nitrogen as a nutrient. They just use it as oxidant for organic carbon. Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium (DNRA) is another way that bacteria oxidize organic carbon under low oxygen conditions. Unlike denitrification, DNRA transform nitrate into ammonium, NH4+, which can be held in the soil on cation exchange sites. Like denitrification, DNRA makes carbonate ions, CO3(2-) as the oxidized carbon waste product, and produces by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO. So, denitrification versus denitrification. Cause or effect of climate change? Yes. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The majority of viewers with basic education in science will already recognize the term "denitrification" as the microbial biochemical process in soil or water that turns nitrate, NO3-, into dinitrogen gas, N2, with some by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO. Stratospheric denitrification is much less likely to be familiar to most scientifically educated viewers. This is because it has been barely a quarter century since its discovery as a process occurring in the stratosphere. Google can give a quick overview with the search terms, "Stratospheric denitrification" Google AI: "Stratospheric denitrification is the permanent removal of reactive nitrogen compounds (like nitric acid, HNO3) from the lower stratosphere. It occurs in extremely cold polar winter regions when HNO3 condenses into solid cloud particles, which grow large enough to rapidly fall downward through gravity, carrying the nitrogen away."
28-06-2026 22:41
IBdaMann★★★★★ (15313)	Im a BM wrote: You could "win" the scientific "debate" much more rapidly if you simply repeat Into the Night's Royal Decree, "There is no such thing as 'denitrification'." You can't win anything involving Climate Change until you unambiguously define the global climate in a way that doesn't violate physics, math, logic and economics. Until then, there is no debate, nor is there even a conversation. You are simply dismissed. In the meantime, just wish yourself out of the hole you dug for yourself in the corner into which you backed yourself. Im a BM wrote: Everyone becomes MORE STUPID by reading comments by these two scientifically illiterate moron TROLLS. ... says the moron who refers to tropospheric ozone decomposition as physically impossible stratospheric ozone depletion. Im a BM wrote:Just add "denitrification" to the list of common scientific terms that are really just meaningless "buzzwords" OK, because you requested it. Get your atmospheric layers straight.
28-06-2026 22:50
Into the Night★★★★★ (24251)	sealover wrote: Does denitrification cause climate change? Does climate change cause denitrification? YES to both questions, in more ways than one. Holy Words (denitrification, climate change). Buzzword fallacies. Climate cannot change. sealover wrote: Because there is more than one kind of "denitrification". Some words are not limited to single meaning in every context. Your word games won't work, Robert. sealover wrote: Stratospheric denitrification, a physical process occurring many kilometers above the Earth's surface, is very different than the biochemical process of denitrification that occurs under low oxygen conditions in soil and water. There is no such thing as 'stratospheric denitrification'. There is no such thing as 'biochemistry'. Holy Words (stratosphere, denitrification, physical process, many kilometers, biochemical, process, low oxygen) Buzzword fallacies. sealover wrote: Stratospheric denitrification is caused by climate change. The stratosphere is colder now than it was during most of the 20th century. Climate cannot change. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the stratosphere of Earth. You are ignoring the 2nd law of thermodynamics again. Homunculus fallacy. sealover wrote: In the dead of winter over the poles, the stratosphere now gets cold enough for nitric acid, HNO3, to condense into droplets to form polar stratospheric clouds. At times it gets so cold that droplets of liquid nitric acid freeze into solid crystals of nitric acid ice. These HNO3 crystals fall down (precipitate) from the stratosphere in a process they call stratospheric denitrification. This didn't happen when we had a warmer stratosphere, until the 1990s. What nitric acid? There are no 'polar stratospheric clouds'. There is no such thing as 'stratospheric denitrification'. It is not possible to measure the temperature of Earth's stratosphere. You are ignoring the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Homunculus fallacy. sealover wrote: There is much to be discussed about the consequences of stratospheric denitrification, with opposing schools of thought, and confounding evidence. In one model, ozone-damaging products of our CFCs (freon, etc.) and other ozone destroying agents get sequestered into those polar stratospheric cloud droplets, and upon precipitation when they freeze into ice crystals are removed to where they can do no harm to the ozone. In another model, the presence of nitric acid ice crystals provides a surface to adsorb ozone-destroying agents and hold them steady in place for repeated destruction of passing ozone molecules. Did stratospheric denitrification save the ozone layer from our CFCs? Is stratospheric denitrification the biggest threat to the ozone layer since CFCs? There is no such thing as 'stratospheric denitrification'. Void evidence. CFCs do not damage ozone. They simply don't react with it. It is not possible to destroy the ozone layer. You are ignoring the Chapman cycle. You are ignoring the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Homunculus fallacy. What 'nitric acid'? sealover wrote: Denitrification in soil and water causes climate change. Climate cannot change. sealover wrote: Microbial denitrification in soil and water, on the other hand. The nitrous oxide, N2O by product of the biochemical process is a greenhouse gas 200-300 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, CO2, gram per gram or molecule per molecule. Under low oxygen conditions, denitrifying bacteria use nitrate, NO3- as a terminal electron acceptor to oxidize organic carbon for metabolic energy. The organic carbon is oxidized to carbonate ion, CO3(2-), and the nitrate is reduced to dinitrogen gas, N2. A very small percentage of by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO is produced. Nitrogen isn't in water. There is no such thing as 'biochemistry'. There is no such thing as a 'greenhouse gas'. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. You are ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics. You cannot create energy out of nothing. There is no such thing as 'denytrifing bacteria'. Nitrate is not a chemical. There is no such thing as a 'terminal electron acceptor'. Carbon is not organic. Carbonate is not a chemical. sealover wrote: Microbial denitrification is by far the largest source of nitrous oxide emission to the atmosphere. When this occurs as a direct result of our application of nitrogen fertilizer, those nitrous oxide emissions can be characterized as "anthropogenic". If human activity is responsible for global warming, then there is another HUGE "anthropogenic" source of nitrous oxide emissions from ecosystem disturbances such as the thawing of permafrost as tundra shifts to taiga, or the generally accelerated decomposition of soil organic matter globally. There is no such thing as 'microbial denitrification'. Nitrogen is not a fertilizer. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. There is no such thing as 'ecosystem'. The surface of permafrost thaws every summer. This is normal. It is not possible to measure the "decomposition of Earth's soil organic matter". sealover wrote: Microbial nitrate reduction is the biggest source and accounts for the lion's share of global nitrous oxide emissions. But denitrification isn't the only contributor. Another pathway of nitrate reduction is being increasingly recognized as a major source of nitrous oxide emission. Denitrification is "dissimilatory" nitrate reduction, because the bacteria do not assimilate the nitrogen as a nutrient. They just use it as oxidant for organic carbon. Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium (DNRA) is another way that bacteria oxidize organic carbon under low oxygen conditions. Unlike denitrification, DNRA transform nitrate into ammonium, NH4+, which can be held in the soil on cation exchange sites. Like denitrification, DNRA makes carbonate ions, CO3(2-) as the oxidized carbon waste product, and produces by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO. Nitrate is not a chemical. It is not possible to measure the total nitrous oxide on Earth. Denitrification is not a reaction. There is no such thing as 'dissimilatory nitrate reduction'. Nitrogen is not oxygen. Carbon is not oxygen. Carbon is not organic. Ammonium is not a chemical. Carbonate is not a chemical. Carbon is not waste. Carbon contains no oxygen. Carbon is not nitrogen. sealover wrote: So, denitrification versus denitrification. Cause or effect of climate change? Yes. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Buzzword fallacies. Your word games don't work, Robert. Climate cannot change. sealover wrote: The majority of viewers with basic education in science will already recognize the term "denitrification" as the microbial biochemical process in soil or water that turns nitrate, NO3-, into dinitrogen gas, N2, with some by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO. Denitrification is not a reaction. There is no such thing as 'biochemistry'. Nitrate is not a chemical. sealover wrote: Stratospheric denitrification is much less likely to be familiar to most scientifically educated viewers. This is because it has been barely a quarter century since its discovery as a process occurring in the stratosphere. There is no such thing as 'stratospheric denitrification'. You deny science. sealover wrote: Google can give a quick overview with the search terms, "Stratospheric denitrification" Google is not sentient. Google is not a Holy Oracle. Google is not science. Google is not chemistry. [b]sealover wrote: ...deleted AI slop... Don't try to substitute your brain for AI, Zombie. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
30-06-2026 18:53
sealover ★★★★★ (2123)	Does denitrification cause climate change? Does climate change cause denitrification? YES to both questions, in more ways than one. Because there is more than one kind of "denitrification". Some words are not limited to single meaning in every context. Stratospheric denitrification, a physical process occurring many kilometers above the Earth's surface, is very different than the biochemical process of denitrification that occurs under low oxygen conditions in soil and water. Stratospheric denitrification is caused by climate change. The stratosphere is colder now than it was during most of the 20th century. In the dead of winter over the poles, the stratosphere now gets cold enough for nitric acid, HNO3, to condense into droplets to form polar stratospheric clouds. At times it gets so cold that droplets of liquid nitric acid freeze into solid crystals of nitric acid ice. These HNO3 crystals fall down (precipitate) from the stratosphere in a process they call stratospheric denitrification. This didn't happen when we had a warmer stratosphere, until the 1990s. There is much to be discussed about the consequences of stratospheric denitrification, with opposing schools of thought, and confounding evidence. In one model, ozone-damaging products of our CFCs (freon, etc.) and other ozone destroying agents get sequestered into those polar stratospheric cloud droplets, and upon precipitation when they freeze into ice crystals are removed to where they can do no harm to the ozone. In another model, the presence of nitric acid ice crystals provides a surface to adsorb ozone-destroying agents and hold them steady in place for repeated destruction of passing ozone molecules. Did stratospheric denitrification save the ozone layer from our CFCs? Is stratospheric denitrification the biggest threat to the ozone layer since CFCs? Denitrification in soil and water causes climate change. Microbial denitrification in soil and water, on the other hand. The nitrous oxide, N2O by product of the biochemical process is a greenhouse gas 200-300 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, CO2, gram per gram or molecule per molecule. Under low oxygen conditions, denitrifying bacteria use nitrate, NO3- as a terminal electron acceptor to oxidize organic carbon for metabolic energy. The organic carbon is oxidized to carbonate ion, CO3(2-), and the nitrate is reduced to dinitrogen gas, N2. A very small percentage of by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO is produced. Microbial denitrification is by far the largest source of nitrous oxide emission to the atmosphere. When this occurs as a direct result of our application of nitrogen fertilizer, those nitrous oxide emissions can be characterized as "anthropogenic". If human activity is responsible for global warming, then there is another HUGE "anthropogenic" source of nitrous oxide emissions from ecosystem disturbances such as the thawing of permafrost as tundra shifts to taiga, or the generally accelerated decomposition of soil organic matter globally. Microbial nitrate reduction is the biggest source and accounts for the lion's share of global nitrous oxide emissions. But denitrification isn't the only contributor. Another pathway of nitrate reduction is being increasingly recognized as a major source of nitrous oxide emission. Denitrification is "dissimilatory" nitrate reduction, because the bacteria do not assimilate the nitrogen as a nutrient. They just use it as oxidant for organic carbon. Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium (DNRA) is another way that bacteria oxidize organic carbon under low oxygen conditions. Unlike denitrification, DNRA transform nitrate into ammonium, NH4+, which can be held in the soil on cation exchange sites. Like denitrification, DNRA makes carbonate ions, CO3(2-) as the oxidized carbon waste product, and produces by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO. So, denitrification versus denitrification. Cause or effect of climate change? Yes. ---------------------------------------------------------------- And she didn't even have a PENIS! Eunice Newton Foote (1819-1888) was the first scientist to publish that "carbonic acid gas" (what chemists used to call "carbon dioxide") could cause greenhouse effect. In 1856 she performed experiments using cylinders, sunlight, and different gases to evaluate their heat absorbing properties. Her cylinder filled with carbonic acid gas warmed up much more than one full of your basic air with 78% N2, 21% O2, about 1% argon, and just a smidgeon of good old CO2. Due to her glaring lack of a PENIS, she was not allowed to actually give the presentation where her results were first presented at a major conference. She had to use a surrogate "beard" to present her results for her. Also, if you Google "stratospheric denitrification" you can see more about different theories of how it relates to ozone layer thinning. Google AI leans into the idea that the denitrification events remove something that protected the ozone layer rather than something that was damaging it. The jury is still out. Edited on 30-06-2026 19:12
30-06-2026 23:33
Into the Night★★★★★ (24251)	sealover wrote: Eunice Newton Foote (1819-1888) was the first scientist to publish that "carbonic acid gas" (what chemists used to call "carbon dioxide") could cause greenhouse effect. There is no such thing as 'carbonic acid gas'. Carbon dioxide is not an acid. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. You are still ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics. sealover wrote: In 1856 she performed experiments using cylinders, sunlight, and different gases to evaluate their heat absorbing properties. Heat cannot be absorbed. The Earth is not a cylinder. sealover wrote: Her cylinder filled with carbonic acid gas warmed up much more than one full of your basic air with 78% N2, 21% O2, about 1% argon, and just a smidgeon of good old CO2. There is no such thing as 'carbonic acid gas'. sealover wrote: ...deleted childish sexual references... Also, if you Google "stratospheric denitrification" you can see more about different theories of how it relates to ozone layer thinning. Google AI leans into the idea that the denitrification events remove something that protected the ozone layer rather than something that was damaging it. The jury is still out. There is no such thing as 'stratospheric denitification'. It is not possible to destroy the ozone layer. Google is not science. AI is not science. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
30-06-2026 23:36
Im a BM ★★★★★ (3712)	Into the Night wrote: sealover wrote: Eunice Newton Foote (1819-1888) was the first scientist to publish that "carbonic acid gas" (what chemists used to call "carbon dioxide") could cause greenhouse effect. There is no such thing as 'carbonic acid gas'. Carbon dioxide is not an acid. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. You are still ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics. sealover wrote: In 1856 she performed experiments using cylinders, sunlight, and different gases to evaluate their heat absorbing properties. Heat cannot be absorbed. The Earth is not a cylinder. sealover wrote: Her cylinder filled with carbonic acid gas warmed up much more than one full of your basic air with 78% N2, 21% O2, about 1% argon, and just a smidgeon of good old CO2. There is no such thing as 'carbonic acid gas'. sealover wrote: ...deleted childish sexual references... Also, if you Google "stratospheric denitrification" you can see more about different theories of how it relates to ozone layer thinning. Google AI leans into the idea that the denitrification events remove something that protected the ozone layer rather than something that was damaging it. The jury is still out. There is no such thing as 'stratospheric denitification'. It is not possible to destroy the ozone layer. Google is not science. AI is not science. And the ONLY source you EVER need to cite to support your contrarian assertions is your own self evident omniscience. Got it!
01-07-2026 04:19
Into the Night★★★★★ (24251)	Im a BM wrote: And the ONLY source you EVER need to cite to support your contrarian assertions is your own self evident omniscience. Got it! Inversion fallacy. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
01-07-2026 08:51
IBdaMann★★★★★ (15313)	Im a BM wrote: You could "win" the scientific "debate" much more rapidly if you simply repeat Into the Night's Royal Decree, "There is no such thing as 'denitrification'." You can't win anything involving Climate Change until you unambiguously define the global climate in a way that doesn't violate physics, math, logic and economics. Until then, there is no debate, nor is there even a conversation. You are simply dismissed. In the meantime, just wish yourself out of the hole you dug for yourself in the corner into which you backed yourself. Im a BM wrote: Everyone becomes MORE STUPID by reading comments by these two scientifically illiterate moron TROLLS. ... says the moron who refers to tropospheric ozone decomposition as physically impossible stratospheric ozone depletion. Im a BM wrote:Just add "denitrification" to the list of common scientific terms that are really just meaningless "buzzwords" OK, because you requested it. Get your atmospheric layers straight.
01-07-2026 18:22
sealover ★★★★★ (2123)	Does denitrification cause climate change? Does climate change cause denitrification? YES to both questions, in more ways than one. Because there is more than one kind of "denitrification". Some words are not limited to single meaning in every context. Stratospheric denitrification, a physical process occurring many kilometers above the Earth's surface, is very different than the biochemical process of denitrification that occurs under low oxygen conditions in soil and water. Stratospheric denitrification is caused by climate change. The stratosphere is colder now than it was during most of the 20th century. In the dead of winter over the poles, the stratosphere now gets cold enough for nitric acid, HNO3, to condense into droplets to form polar stratospheric clouds. At times it gets so cold that droplets of liquid nitric acid freeze into solid crystals of nitric acid ice. These HNO3 crystals fall down (precipitate) from the stratosphere in a process they call stratospheric denitrification. This didn't happen when we had a warmer stratosphere, until the 1990s. There is much to be discussed about the consequences of stratospheric denitrification, with opposing schools of thought, and confounding evidence. In one model, ozone-damaging products of our CFCs (freon, etc.) and other ozone destroying agents get sequestered into those polar stratospheric cloud droplets, and upon precipitation when they freeze into ice crystals are removed to where they can do no harm to the ozone. In another model, the presence of nitric acid ice crystals provides a surface to adsorb ozone-destroying agents and hold them steady in place for repeated destruction of passing ozone molecules. Did stratospheric denitrification save the ozone layer from our CFCs? Is stratospheric denitrification the biggest threat to the ozone layer since CFCs? Denitrification in soil and water causes climate change. Microbial denitrification in soil and water, on the other hand. The nitrous oxide, N2O by product of the biochemical process is a greenhouse gas 200-300 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, CO2, gram per gram or molecule per molecule. Under low oxygen conditions, denitrifying bacteria use nitrate, NO3- as a terminal electron acceptor to oxidize organic carbon for metabolic energy. The organic carbon is oxidized to carbonate ion, CO3(2-), and the nitrate is reduced to dinitrogen gas, N2. A very small percentage of by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO is produced. Microbial denitrification is by far the largest source of nitrous oxide emission to the atmosphere. When this occurs as a direct result of our application of nitrogen fertilizer, those nitrous oxide emissions can be characterized as "anthropogenic". If human activity is responsible for global warming, then there is another HUGE "anthropogenic" source of nitrous oxide emissions from ecosystem disturbances such as the thawing of permafrost as tundra shifts to taiga, or the generally accelerated decomposition of soil organic matter globally. Microbial nitrate reduction is the biggest source and accounts for the lion's share of global nitrous oxide emissions. But denitrification isn't the only contributor. Another pathway of nitrate reduction is being increasingly recognized as a major source of nitrous oxide emission. Denitrification is "dissimilatory" nitrate reduction, because the bacteria do not assimilate the nitrogen as a nutrient. They just use it as oxidant for organic carbon. Dissimilatory reduction of nitrate to ammonium (DNRA) is another way that bacteria oxidize organic carbon under low oxygen conditions. Unlike denitrification, DNRA transform nitrate into ammonium, NH4+, which can be held in the soil on cation exchange sites. Like denitrification, DNRA makes carbonate ions, CO3(2-) as the oxidized carbon waste product, and produces by product nitrous oxide, N2O and nitric oxide, NO. So, denitrification versus denitrification. Cause or effect of climate change? Yes. ---------------------------------------------------------------- And she didn't even have a PENIS! Eunice Newton Foote (1819-1888) was the first scientist to publish that "carbonic acid gas" (what chemists used to call "carbon dioxide") could cause greenhouse effect. In 1856 she performed experiments using cylinders, sunlight, and different gases to evaluate their heat absorbing properties. Her cylinder filled with carbonic acid gas warmed up much more than one full of your basic air with 78% N2, 21% O2, about 1% argon, and just a smidgeon of good old CO2. Due to her glaring lack of a PENIS, she was not allowed to actually give the presentation where her results were first presented at a major conference. She had to use a surrogate "beard" to present her results for her. Also, if you Google "stratospheric denitrification" you can see more about different theories of how it relates to ozone layer thinning. Google AI leans into the idea that the denitrification events remove something that protected the ozone layer rather than something that was damaging it. The jury is still out. PLEASE DO NOT EVER STOP SPAMMING!
01-07-2026 19:47
IBdaMann★★★★★ (15313)	Im a BM wrote: You could "win" the scientific "debate" much more rapidly if you simply repeat Into the Night's Royal Decree, "There is no such thing as 'denitrification'." You can't win anything involving Climate Change until you unambiguously define the global climate in a way that doesn't violate physics, math, logic and economics. Until then, there is no debate, nor is there even a conversation. You are simply dismissed. In the meantime, just wish yourself out of the hole you dug for yourself in the corner into which you backed yourself. Im a BM wrote: Everyone becomes MORE STUPID by reading comments by these two scientifically illiterate moron TROLLS. ... says the moron who refers to tropospheric ozone decomposition as physically impossible stratospheric ozone depletion. Im a BM wrote:Just add "denitrification" to the list of common scientific terms that are really just meaningless "buzzwords" OK, because you requested it. Get your atmospheric layers straight.
01-07-2026 20:44
Im a BM ★★★★★ (3712)	IBdaMann wrote: Im a BM wrote: You could "win" the scientific "debate" much more rapidly if you simply repeat Into the Night's Royal Decree, "There is no such thing as 'denitrification'." You can't win anything involving Climate Change until you unambiguously define the global climate in a way that doesn't violate physics, math, logic and economics. Until then, there is no debate, nor is there even a conversation. You are simply dismissed. In the meantime, just wish yourself out of the hole you dug for yourself in the corner into which you backed yourself. Im a BM wrote: Everyone becomes MORE STUPID by reading comments by these two scientifically illiterate moron TROLLS. ... says the moron who refers to tropospheric ozone decomposition as physically impossible stratospheric ozone depletion. Im a BM wrote:Just add "denitrification" to the list of common scientific terms that are really just meaningless "buzzwords" OK, because you requested it. Get your atmospheric layers straight. I imagine that you are able to understand why it would be more fun for me to choose to play with someone such as Patricio, rather than the likes of YOU. It makes sense, right?
01-07-2026 22:30
Into the Night★★★★★ (24251)	Im a BM wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Im a BM wrote: You could "win" the scientific "debate" much more rapidly if you simply repeat Into the Night's Royal Decree, "There is no such thing as 'denitrification'." You can't win anything involving Climate Change until you unambiguously define the global climate in a way that doesn't violate physics, math, logic and economics. Until then, there is no debate, nor is there even a conversation. You are simply dismissed. In the meantime, just wish yourself out of the hole you dug for yourself in the corner into which you backed yourself. Im a BM wrote: Everyone becomes MORE STUPID by reading comments by these two scientifically illiterate moron TROLLS. ... says the moron who refers to tropospheric ozone decomposition as physically impossible stratospheric ozone depletion. Im a BM wrote:Just add "denitrification" to the list of common scientific terms that are really just meaningless "buzzwords" OK, because you requested it. Get your atmospheric layers straight. I imagine that you are able to understand why it would be more fun for me to choose to play with someone such as Patricio, rather than the likes of YOU. It makes sense, right? There are better things to do than play with yourself. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
04-07-2026 02:12
Im a BM ★★★★★ (3712)	Into the Night wrote: Im a BM wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Im a BM wrote: You could "win" the scientific "debate" much more rapidly if you simply repeat Into the Night's Royal Decree, "There is no such thing as 'denitrification'." You can't win anything involving Climate Change until you unambiguously define the global climate in a way that doesn't violate physics, math, logic and economics. Until then, there is no debate, nor is there even a conversation. You are simply dismissed. In the meantime, just wish yourself out of the hole you dug for yourself in the corner into which you backed yourself. Im a BM wrote: Everyone becomes MORE STUPID by reading comments by these two scientifically illiterate moron TROLLS. ... says the moron who refers to tropospheric ozone decomposition as physically impossible stratospheric ozone depletion. Im a BM wrote:Just add "denitrification" to the list of common scientific terms that are really just meaningless "buzzwords" OK, because you requested it. Get your atmospheric layers straight. I imagine that you are able to understand why it would be more fun for me to choose to play with someone such as Patricio, rather than the likes of YOU. It makes sense, right? There are better things to do than play with yourself. How do you know? Were you there?

Join the debate Denitrification and Climate Change: Cause OR Effect?:

Threads	Replies	Last post
The SCIENCE of the "Greenhouse Effect"	418	11-07-2026 21:25
The Compound Effect and the Self-Interest of the Individual	7	15-12-2024 22:36
The "radiative Greenhouse effect" does not exist	145	24-04-2024 02:48
'Greenhouse' Effect?	49	30-11-2023 06:45
the logarithmic effect of CO2	6	15-11-2020 23:54