Remember me
▼ Content

Less CO2


Less CO218-07-2020 03:06
duncan61
★★★☆☆
(467)
According to the CO2 warming theory what is the reverse effect.Tmiddles likes these brain teasers like melting wood and comparing a rock to a living creature decomposing ice.If we turned of all industry and the CO2 dropped to the level where plants die of around 180ppm or so will the Earths temperature drop a few degrees or does it keep going up regardless


duncan61
18-07-2020 03:53
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7324)
duncan61 wrote:
According to the CO2 warming theory what is the reverse effect.Tmiddles likes these brain teasers like melting wood and comparing a rock to a living creature decomposing ice.If we turned of all industry and the CO2 dropped to the level where plants die of around 180ppm or so will the Earths temperature drop a few degrees or does it keep going up regardless


Aaaah, great question! Allow me to answer that question thoroughly and completely.

The Global Warming religion is a fanatical cult preaching the BAD NEWS of Global Warming. There simply can be no Global Cooling. You try to point to science and to cause<-->effect to ask about global cooling when CO2 is reduced but to no avail. The warmizombies will have none of it. They have no science supporting their religion in the first place so appealing to science will get you nowhere. The warmizombies will, however, appeal to their dogma about "tipping points" and how it is already "too late." This is, after all, the BAD NEWS of Global Warming.

If you press the issue, warmizombies like tmiddles will pivot; they will try to shift the semantics without your notice. tmiddles will, for example, tell you to not focus on the effect of CO2 but rather to focus on the "unprecedented rate of change" for which life on earth cannot adapt. There. Done. Mission accomplished. The topic has been successfully transitioned away from your potentially damaging point involving cold, hard science and into something theoretical and debateable, ... something that also happens to fully assume Global Warming in the first place.

The short answer, however, is "no.". Warmizombies cannot abide the Satanic sacrilege of Global Cooling. Don't even try. You're just wasting your time.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
18-07-2020 11:42
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★☆
(1111)
And KA-BLAM! I think that's a wrap on this thread. Very good question in the OP and a very good response to it. Well done guys!
18-07-2020 13:47
duncan61
★★★☆☆
(467)
I am super happy.My grandadaugher just skated about me happy as a bug and showining off her ability to skate.She has no climate anxiety.I am so looking forward to getting my CO2 thing.
18-07-2020 16:47
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2209)
CO2 is a trace gas, and it's never had any magic to have any sort of influence over global anything, except plant growth. It was never about CO2, to begin with, it was about controlling energy, which is meaning derived from burning fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are actually cheap and plentiful, easy to work with, transport, and relatively safe. The cost, is mainly taxes, and environmental fees. Solar panels and windmills are the least efficient replacements, both are mature technologies, and won't be seeing any major advances or breakthroughs, that will change much. Both take up a whole lot of acreage, and seldom deliver anywhere near the promised output. Both are intermittent, sun doesn't always shine, wind doesn't always blow... Charging batteries is also incredibly inefficient and wasteful. The precious little electricity produced by renewables, is mostly wasted. If everyone were to suddenly shift to electric vehicles, alone, right now, the electric grid would crash, likely permanent damage in many areas. It couldn't handle the increased demand. The current grid struggles during extreme weather, like winter storms, or heat waves in the summer.

Even if successful to stop the use of Fossil Fuels, and man-made CO2, they won't be satisfied. They'll push removing CO2 from the atmosphere. This isn't going to be cheap and easy either, since CO2 is a trace gas, and scattered all over a huge planet. It has to be removed, since there is huge volumes of 'hidden' CO2, and other 'greenhouse' gasses trapped in frozen ice, in the oceans, and pretty much anywhere nobody could actually measure. They will claim that we need the machinery to scrub CO2 badly, and on a large scale, before we reach the 'tipping point', and all that trapped, planet-killing CO2 is released, from it's hiding places. These machines would have to be large, automatic, and in large numbers, lot more acreage, and energy use. A very dangerous proposal, since CO2 is vital for all life on the planet. Will they be able to monitor, and shutdown these CO2 removal machines, before killing off most of the plant life on the planet? Plants are pretty tolerant, and would do a lot better, with more CO2, than is currently available. I'm old enough to remember food shortages and famine, from the 60s and 70s. Most of which was corrected, with better farming practices, irrigation, but there is no substitute for CO2.

With cheap and plentiful energy, and more food, we would be doing a whole lot better, even if it does get a few degrees warmer. We weren't born without fur, because we started out in a much warmer world. We are genetically able to deal with a much warmer environment. The normal winter temperature, is still often higher, than summer temperatures where I grew up, in Oregon. I adapted easy, and quick. O believe most humans would do as well. I've had a few fur covered pets, that have done just as well. My current cat, spends much of his time outdoors. He was a stray, not sure what his deal is with that.

Basically, climate change, is about controlling energy use and production, and wasting a lot of resources, to do it. In order to 'save' the planet, they want to destroy most anything that makes our lives easier, and less expensive.
18-07-2020 17:40
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7324)
duncan61 wrote:I am super happy.My grandadaugher just skated about me happy as a bug and showining off her ability to skate.She has no climate anxiety.I am so looking forward to getting my CO2 thing.

Congratulations. I made sure my children could "in-line" when very young which enabled them to ice skate when very young which enabled my son to play hockey and my daughter to figure skate and nipped all Climate BAD News anxiety in the bud. I'm happy to report that both are free to live happy, healthy, productive lives.

Yep, skating ... great decision.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
19-07-2020 17:33
James___
★★★★★
(2996)
duncan61 wrote:
According to the CO2 warming theory what is the reverse effect.Tmiddles likes these brain teasers like melting wood and comparing a rock to a living creature decomposing ice.If we turned of all industry and the CO2 dropped to the level where plants die of around 180ppm or so will the Earths temperature drop a few degrees or does it keep going up regardless



Just an FYI, with Australia, Australians know that nitric acid and sulphuric acid form polar stratospheric clouds. And these 2 acids come from sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) which come from the combustion process.
And this influences the Southern Oscillation. Basically, if you compare the amount of drought and bushfires that Australia has had since 1990 and then the 30 years before that, then the you might consider that Australians are actually concerned about the hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica.
With that said, both the science and the politics need to be understood and at the moment that really isn't happening.
20-07-2020 02:14
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7324)
James___ wrote:Basically, if you compare the amount of drought and bushfires that Australia has had since 1990 and then the 30 years before that, then the you might consider that Australians are actually concerned about the hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica.


So this got me thinking about Norway and the climate of the Geiranger Fjord. The following graphic contains my data on the region's atmospheric CO2.

.
Attached image:

20-07-2020 02:34
James___
★★★★★
(2996)
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:Basically, if you compare the amount of drought and bushfires that Australia has had since 1990 and then the 30 years before that, then the you might consider that Australians are actually concerned about the hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica.


So this got me thinking about Norway and the climate of the Geiranger Fjord. The following graphic contains my data on the region's atmospheric CO2.

.



I'm going to have to save that pic and will probably share it on social media as well.
The hole in the ozone layer is basically caused by acid rain. CO2 helps to repair the damage. The science is incomplete at the moment. It's possible that everything is about the hole in the ozone layer. The ozone destroyed there affects the entire planet.
BTW, to be an a$$hole because you brought Ålésund and Geiranger Fjord into the subject ( and yes, when I lived in Norway, my father did take us up into the mountains, just awesome when you're on the ridge) that global warming is caused by Luna, in simple Engleske son, the Moon.
20-07-2020 18:53
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7324)
James___ wrote:I'm going to have to save that pic and will probably share it on social media as well.

I noticed a flaw in the pic that I posted. I have since fixed it. Use this attached one instead.

I was wondering if you wanted a version with your avatar in it.

James___ wrote: The hole in the ozone layer is basically caused by acid rain.

That's not so bad. You can start worrying the day we get alkaline rain.

.
Attached image:


Edited on 20-07-2020 18:54
22-07-2020 02:16
James___
★★★★★
(2996)
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:I'm going to have to save that pic and will probably share it on social media as well.

I noticed a flaw in the pic that I posted. I have since fixed it. Use this attached one instead.

I was wondering if you wanted a version with your avatar in it.

James___ wrote: The hole in the ozone layer is basically caused by acid rain.

That's not so bad. You can start worrying the day we get alkaline rain.

.



Unfortunately I don't have a picture of my avatar in flight. Anyhting else would diminish your work. I'll look for one though.




Join the debate Less CO2:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
CO2 sensor112-08-2020 19:10
The ACTUAL Percentage of Atmospheric CO22026-07-2020 18:02
CO2 level to cause harm1813-07-2020 22:08
CO2521-06-2020 15:37
where all the co2 at120-05-2020 14:13
▲ 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 © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact