Remember me
▼ Content

I agree CO2 should be restricted, but not for the reason promoted


I agree CO2 should be restricted, but not for the reason promoted30-01-2017 22:17
Tai Hai Chen
★★★★☆
(1079)
I don't think CO2 causes global warming. CO2 is harmless to the body except in very large quantities. I think CO2 restricted to no more than 440 ppm is enough.
30-01-2017 22:22
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
I don't think CO2 causes global warming. CO2 is harmless to the body except in very large quantities. I think CO2 restricted to no more than 440 ppm is enough.


Why 440ppm???

The CO2 in the room you are in is loads more than that.

This is a science area of debate. If you know nothing about science then you can't be in it.
31-01-2017 00:23
Tai Hai Chen
★★★★☆
(1079)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
I don't think CO2 causes global warming. CO2 is harmless to the body except in very large quantities. I think CO2 restricted to no more than 440 ppm is enough.


Why 440ppm???

The CO2 in the room you are in is loads more than that.

This is a science area of debate. If you know nothing about science then you can't be in it.


440 because that's what it was tens of millions of years ago and which is known to be safe levels for all floral and fauna.
31-01-2017 01:05
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
I don't think CO2 causes global warming. CO2 is harmless to the body except in very large quantities. I think CO2 restricted to no more than 440 ppm is enough.


Why 440ppm???

The CO2 in the room you are in is loads more than that.

This is a science area of debate. If you know nothing about science then you can't be in it.


440 because that's what it was tens of millions of years ago and which is known to be safe levels for all floral and fauna.


It is known to be safe for al lflora and fauna at far higher levels than that.

Flora loves the stuff. Commercial greenhouses are kept at high levels of it, sometimes at such levels that it is deadly for humans.
31-01-2017 01:11
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
Its important that "sigh-ants" be delineated by...... old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' AGW denier liar whiners without science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in unearned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.
Edited on 31-01-2017 01:13




Join the debate I agree CO2 should be restricted, but not for the reason promoted:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Why can't you say Venus is hotter than Mercury because Venus got CO2?5213-12-2019 21:47
There is no scientific theory or evidence that suggest CO2 traps heat better than O2 or N226413-12-2019 20:52
Reason why companies are not converting to 100% electric, focusing on Porsche1806-12-2019 23:29
Poulation controll revisited - CO2 compensation through population control814-11-2019 23:28
Is it not true that brains shrink due to increase in CO2 displacing O2?208-11-2019 18:45
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact