- Joined
- Jan 3, 2014
- Messages
- 16,501
- Reaction score
- 3,829
- Location
- Sheffield
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Rise in CO2 has 'greened Planet Earth'
Carbon dioxide emissions from industrial society have driven a huge growth in trees and other plants.
A new study says that if the extra green leaves prompted by rising CO2 levels were laid in a carpet, it would cover twice the continental USA.
Climate sceptics argue the findings show that the extra CO2 is actually benefiting the planet.
But the researchers say the fertilisation effect diminishes over time.
They warn the positives of CO2 are likely to be outweighed by the negatives.
What practical, scientific solutions are being promoted by AGW believers?I am concerned about global warming for practical and personal reasons, not because I believe we are destroying the planet.
The planet will go on existing right up until the Sun goes nova or it is destroyed by some other cosmic catastrophe, even if every living thing on it dies off. Our planet has existed for billions of years before any life appeared, and will continue to exist of all life is expunged from it's surface.
Moreover, we know from the fossil record that life has changed many times since it first emerged on this planet and will likely continue to change until completely eradicated.
What we do will not destroy this planet. That is pretty clear.
However, what we do will have a direct effect on life as we know it and that is the concern expressed by people who believe that we need to act on those things within our control that are detrimental to OUR continued existence on planet Earth.
I am concerned about global warming for practical and personal reasons, not because I believe we are destroying the planet.
The planet will go on existing right up until the Sun goes nova or it is destroyed by some other cosmic catastrophe, even if every living thing on it dies off. Our planet has existed for billions of years before any life appeared, and will continue to exist of all life is expunged from it's surface.
Moreover, we know from the fossil record that life has changed many times since it first emerged on this planet and will likely continue to change until completely eradicated.
What we do will not destroy this planet. That is pretty clear.
However, what we do will have a direct effect on life as we know it and that is the concern expressed by people who believe that we need to act on those things within our control that are detrimental to OUR continued existence on planet Earth.
Originally Posted by Tim the plumber View Post
I am asking you what you think because you seem to be under the impression that the earth could boil or something.
The worst case scenario, as predicted by the IPCC, is for a 4.2c rise over pre-industrial temperatures by 2100. We already have had 0.8c and have not seen the 0.3c per decade rise needed to achieve this since the graph that predicted it came out 18 years ago.
So what do you think is so bad about it all?
The scientists say several factors play a part in the plant boom, including climate change (8%), more nitrogen in the environment (9%), and shifts in land management (4%).
But the main factor, they say, is plants using extra CO2 from human society to fertilise their growth (70%).
Makes me wonder if the Earth's climate has a very long lived CO2 cycle, on the order a millions of years, as I recall there was a time in the Earths' history were CO2 levels were far beyond what we have today.
The last time there was this much carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Earth's atmosphere, modern humans didn't exist. Megatoothed sharks prowled the oceans, the world's seas were up to 100 feet higher than they are today, and the global average surface temperature was up to 11°F warmer than it is now.
As we near the record for the highest CO2 concentration in human history — 400 parts per million — climate scientists worry about where we were then, and where we're rapidly headed now.
This is the question I have asked another on this forum 8 times so far with no answer. I see that you do not expect the earth to boil but what negative effects do you think are going to result from a small increase in temperatures?
From the link in the OP;
The main change so far seems to be a huge increase in plant fertility. 70% more plants (well, leaves) now due to CO2. I think that's a good thing.
The "cycle" is caled CO2 sequestration and yes it took millions of years for plants to lock all that carbon up. We are releasing it all back into the atmosphere in a few hundred years. What could go wrong with that, right?
Maybe for plants...
But recall, plants were the first things to successfully populate the surface of the earth filled with CO2 from vulcanization. While THEY thrive in a CO2 rich environment, WE don't.
Also, as we grow in population we also cut back on plant life to make more room for our homes and businesses. This growth is not a problem when the human population is small. But it becomes one when we reach a critical mass where there aren't enough plants to feed us or convert the production of CO2 to oxygen needed for our respiration. Killing off plankton does not help this situation either for the atmosphere balance or the maintenance of the ocean's food chain. What then? Think "Soylant Green is people."
We were supposed to reach this "critical mass" of population decades ago. When is the new projection? Maybe we should adopt the Chinese, one child per family policy.
Maybe for plants...
But recall, plants were the first things to successfully populate the surface of the earth filled with CO2 from vulcanization. While THEY thrive in a CO2 rich environment, WE don't.
Also, as we grow in population we also cut back on plant life to make more room for our homes and businesses. This growth is not a problem when the human population is small. But it becomes one when we reach a critical mass where there aren't enough plants to feed us or convert the production of CO2 to oxygen needed for our respiration. Killing off plankton does not help this situation either for the atmosphere balance or the maintenance of the ocean's food chain. What then?
Think "Soylant Green is people." Or imagine the hive cities in the "Warhammer 40K" series for you science fiction fans.
I see that you do not expect the earth to boil but what negative effects do you think are going to result from a small increase in temperatures?
The "cycle" is caled CO2 sequestration and yes it took millions of years for plants to lock all that carbon up. We are releasing it all back into the atmosphere in a few hundred years. What could go wrong with that, right?
The Last Time CO2 Was This High, Humans Didn't Exist | Climate Central
What practical, scientific solutions are being promoted by AGW believers?
The CO2 sequestration cycle that you've identified is something well beyond mankind's ability to significantly influence much less control, such as what the AGW movement is claiming needs to be done and can be done.
We are just practicing out terraforming skillz for Mars..
If you mean we can't put the genie back in the bottle that is correct. But burning and releasing all the sequestered carbon is quite with in our reach and we can certianly send Earth back to the Carboniferous age as far a CO2 goes and once it is out we are stuck with it for millions of years. We also can choose to leave the bulk of sequestered carbon in the ground where it will not effect our climate or the oceans.
If you mean we can't put the genie back in the bottle that is correct. But burning and releasing all the sequestered carbon is quite with in our reach and we can certianly send Earth back to the Carboniferous age as far a CO2 goes and once it is out we are stuck with it for millions of years. We also can choose to leave the bulk of sequestered carbon in the ground where it will not effect our climate or the oceans.
I am concerned about global warming for practical and personal reasons, not because I believe we are destroying the planet.
The planet will go on existing right up until the Sun goes nova or it is destroyed by some other cosmic catastrophe, even if every living thing on it dies off. Our planet has existed for billions of years before any life appeared, and will continue to exist after all life is expunged from it's surface.
Moreover, we know from the fossil record that life has changed many times since it first emerged on this planet and will likely continue to change until completely eradicated.
What we do will not destroy this planet. That is pretty clear.
However, what we do will have a direct effect on life as we know it and that is the concern expressed by Global Warming advocates. People who believe that we need to act on those things within our control that are clearly detrimental to the environment that maintains OUR continued existence on planet Earth.
Probably the greatest source of CO2 from the human race is in all the people breathing. Good luck with curbing that. :screwy:
So far all there has been is 1960's-like babbling about wind power and varying degrees of hysterical predictions all leading to "we need more research". In another forum I read an incredible excuse: "there hasn't been development of solutions because scientists have to fight off deniers"
That's right, the people who question their god state are to blame, never mind the fact not one solution or even protection has even been presented let alone discussed.
There are studies that suggest warming may not be a bad thing. As week speak Canadian farmers on the prairies have added several days to their growing year and can now grow better strains of wheat, canola etc.
Greetings, Erik. :2wave:
DO.NOT.GIVE.THEM.ANY.IDEAS! :mrgreen:
Greetings, Polgara. :2wave:
I'd have to insist that it apply to themselves first and then perhaps others. :mrgreen:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?