Why is CO2 the key to our survival?

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > Why is CO2 the key to our survival?

Why is CO2 the key to our survival?26-09-2020 14:42
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	One of the things that has really bugged me about global warming, is the focus on eliminating CO2. It's a trace gas, but very essential to life. Even the IPCC clearly states that it's not the most potent 'greenhouse' gas. It's not even the most plentiful either, nor does it remain in the atmosphere the longest. We are constantly shown these scary production numbers, of how much CO2 humans produce. The CO2 measurements, specially at Mauna Loa, an active volcano, there is a huge rise in ppm readings, to reflect the massive amounts, creating this 'crisis'. The 'warming' is imperceptible, immeasurable, only shows up with a many year average, considerable mathemagic. There are many ways to tackle a problem, but does it really make any sense to focus on the least threatening aspect of a crisis, when there are only a few centuries left, before we all die horribly? There are claims of massive amounts of CO2 absorbed by the oceans, set to be released, if the global temperature rises too far. We already passed that milestone, couple times... Well, actually, every year, since the polar ice melts, and tropical waters get pretty warm. Living in Florida, I know from personal experience, just how much the water warms each year. Should there be a massive release of ocean CO2 every year? Shouldn't the CO2 readings at Mauna Loa monitoring station spike, off the chart recorder, every summer?
26-09-2020 21:50
keepit ★★★★★ (3060)	Once CO2 gets into the carbon cycle the concentration level lasts for hundreds to a thousand years. Methane lasts for a decade or 2 and is decomposed by the sun into CO2 and water i think. Water vapor lasts for maybe a week and then rains down only to evaporate and then rain down again. co2 being the longest lasting is a big problem because the concentration goes up by a large percentage even though the concentration remains small (trace gas). That increase in % concentration is significant as far as climate change is concerned.
26-09-2020 22:13
GasGuzzler ★★★★★ (2935)	keepit wrote: Once CO2 gets into the carbon cycle the concentration level lasts for hundreds to a thousand years. Methane lasts for a decade or 2 and is decomposed by the sun into CO2 and water i think. Water vapor lasts for maybe a week and then rains down only to evaporate and then rain down again. co2 being the longest lasting is a big problem because the concentration goes up by a large percentage even though the concentration remains small (trace gas). That increase in % concentration is significant as far as climate change is concerned. Have you ever considered doing stand up comedy in Vegas? Work on your delivery a bit and you could sell that routine! "Yep, I farted in front of my wife for the first time, 20 years ago today. You can thank me now for the nice warm November day" HAJAHAHAHAHA! GOOD STUFF!!!! Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
26-09-2020 23:00
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	keepit wrote: Once CO2 gets into the carbon cycle the concentration level lasts for hundreds to a thousand years. Methane lasts for a decade or 2 and is decomposed by the sun into CO2 and water i think. Water vapor lasts for maybe a week and then rains down only to evaporate and then rain down again. co2 being the longest lasting is a big problem because the concentration goes up by a large percentage even though the concentration remains small (trace gas). That increase in % concentration is significant as far as climate change is concerned. Need to read up on the carbon cycle a bit more, most of the carbon, isn't in the CO2 form. Has nothing to do with the atmosphere, for hundreds of years... Might be the longest cycle, but has the least to do with global warming.
26-09-2020 23:20
keepit ★★★★★ (3060)	The carbon spoken of here (the carbon that hasn't entered the carbon cycle) eventually will enter the carbon cycle in geologic time. The carbon that hadn't entered the carbon cycle a long time ago (geologic time) is now entering the carbon cycle. Sometimes you have to think in terms of geologic time. Sometimes even cosmologic time but maybe not for climate change. Learning cosmologic time helps one understand geologic time.

27-09-2020 00:51
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	HarveyH55 wrote: It's not even the most plentiful either, nor does it remain in the atmosphere the longest. We are constantly shown these scary production numbers, of how much CO2 humans produce. Wouldn't it also be great if they were honest and showed "the other half of the equation"? Wouldn't it be great if we were also shown the countless number of plants on the planet, including trees, all bushes, grasses, all algae and seaweed in the ocean, etc., that are the equivalent of ravenous animals that greedily eat up all CO2 that comes their way? Wouldn't it be great if we were given an accurate picture of the dangerously low levels of atmospheric CO2 we have for sustaining the plant life upon which we and all other life depend? Wouldn't it be great if we were told the truth on a regular basis that higher atmospheric CO2 levels would be great as opposed to regular attempts to deceive us into believing that there is somehow too much atmospheric CO2? Wouldn't some honesty and accuracy be great? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
27-09-2020 02:52
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	keepit wrote: Once CO2 gets into the carbon cycle the concentration level lasts for hundreds to a thousand years. Methane lasts for a decade or 2 and is decomposed by the sun into CO2 and water i think. Water vapor lasts for maybe a week and then rains down only to evaporate and then rain down again. co2 being the longest lasting is a big problem because the concentration goes up by a large percentage even though the concentration remains small (trace gas). That increase in % concentration is significant as far as climate change is concerned. I notice now that the CO2 is directly doing the climate change.We have left out the creating warming that will change the climate.Go back and look at the 3 phases to the claim. duncan61
27-09-2020 03:12
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	keepit wrote: The carbon spoken of here (the carbon that hasn't entered the carbon cycle) eventually will enter the carbon cycle in geologic time. The carbon that hadn't entered the carbon cycle a long time ago (geologic time) is now entering the carbon cycle. Sometimes you have to think in terms of geologic time. Sometimes even cosmologic time but maybe not for climate change. Learning cosmologic time helps one understand geologic time. There is a lot of carbon on this planet, that's been in the ground for possibly millions of years. Coal is nearly pure carbon, and needs burning (badly) to enter the carbon cycle. Diamonds are pure carbon, probably never enters the carbon cycle that burns the earth. Two extreme examples, but there are also lots of organic examples as well. About 2.4 million humans die in America every year. Not sure how many choose the box and a plot option, or the burn and urn option. But mankind has been stuffing dead people in the ground. Some of them get dug up thousands of years later, still containing carbon. Here in Florida, we get parts of centuries old shipwrecks wash up on the beaches. Surprising, considering the climate models had them under 3 feet of water, a decade ago... You are misinformed thinking that CO2 in the atmosphere is going to be there a long time. Even the annual California wildfires don't return all the carbon those trees removed from the atmosphere. There is a considerable amount of charcoal all over the place. Most people have change to gas for their backyard BBQ needs.
27-09-2020 03:16
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	IBdaMann wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: It's not even the most plentiful either, nor does it remain in the atmosphere the longest. We are constantly shown these scary production numbers, of how much CO2 humans produce. Wouldn't it also be great if they were honest and showed "the other half of the equation"? Wouldn't it be great if we were also shown the countless number of plants on the planet, including trees, all bushes, grasses, all algae and seaweed in the ocean, etc., that are the equivalent of ravenous animals that greedily eat up all CO2 that comes their way? Wouldn't it be great if we were given an accurate picture of the dangerously low levels of atmospheric CO2 we have for sustaining the plant life upon which we and all other life depend? Wouldn't it be great if we were told the truth on a regular basis that higher atmospheric CO2 levels would be great as opposed to regular attempts to deceive us into believing that there is somehow too much atmospheric CO2? Wouldn't some honesty and accuracy be great? . I don't it's any mistake, that they barely touch on just ho much CO2 this planet consumes. Sort of negates a lot of the 'massive' quantities we produce.
27-09-2020 06:12
GasGuzzler ★★★★★ (2935)	IBdaMann wrote: Wouldn't it be great if we were given an accurate picture of the dangerously low levels of atmospheric CO2 we have for sustaining the plant life upon which we and all other life depend? . Yes! The people bitching about an overpopulated planet and coming food shortages are the same clods advocating for carbon free, which will ensure the shortages/starvation. It's pure evil. Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
27-09-2020 06:48
Into the Night★★★★★ (21599)	keepit wrote: Once CO2 gets into the carbon cycle the concentration level lasts for hundreds to a thousand years. Random numbers. Argument from randU fallacies. keepit wrote: Methane lasts for a decade or 2 Random numbers. Argument from randU fallacies. keepit wrote: and is decomposed by the sun into CO2 and water i think. Nah. You burn it. It's natural gas. keepit wrote: Water vapor lasts for maybe a week and then rains down only to evaporate and then rain down again. Random numbers. Argument from randU fallacy. keepit wrote: co2 being the longest lasting is a big problem because the concentration goes up by a large percentage even though the concentration remains small (trace gas). That increase in % concentration is significant as far as climate change is concerned. Define 'climate change'. No argument presented. Random numbers used as data. Denial of science. Denial of mathematics. Void arguments. Buzzwords. 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
27-09-2020 09:00
Into the Night★★★★★ (21599)	keepit wrote: The carbon spoken of here (the carbon that hasn't entered the carbon cycle) eventually will enter the carbon cycle in geologic time. Define 'geologic time'. keepit wrote: The carbon that hadn't entered the carbon cycle a long time ago (geologic time) is now entering the carbon cycle. How do you know? Have you measure it? (answer: No) keepit wrote: Sometimes you have to think in terms of geologic time. Define 'geologic time'. keepit wrote: Sometimes even cosmologic time Define 'cosmologic time'. keepit wrote: but maybe not for climate change. Define 'climate change'. keepit wrote: Learning cosmologic time helps one understand geologic time. Define 'cosmologic time'. Define 'geologic time'. No argument presented. Buzzwords. Void arguments. 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
27-09-2020 09:34
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	GasGuzzler wrote:Yes! The people bitching about an overpopulated planet and coming food shortages are the same clods advocating for carbon free, which will ensure the shortages/starvation. It's pure evil. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
27-09-2020 17:27
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	GasGuzzler wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Wouldn't it be great if we were given an accurate picture of the dangerously low levels of atmospheric CO2 we have for sustaining the plant life upon which we and all other life depend? . Yes! The people bitching about an overpopulated planet and coming food shortages are the same clods advocating for carbon free, which will ensure the shortages/starvation. It's pure evil. You sound just like Bernie Sanders except that you have a different agenda.

Join the debate Why is CO2 the key to our survival?:

Threads	Replies	Last post
Fossil Fuel Substitution for reduced emission of CO2, mercury, lead, arsenic, cadmium..	392	01-12-2023 21:58
Proof That Too Much CO2 Is An Existential Threat	326	07-11-2023 19:16
There is no scientific theory or evidence that suggest CO2 traps heat better than O2 or N2	533	30-01-2023 07:22
CO2 Is Helping the Ozone Layer to Recover	1	13-08-2022 05:54
The New International Personal Passport Will Be The Key For Society Evolution	0	12-08-2022 09:51