[ Envirowatchers ] [ Main Menu ]
18985
From: chatillon, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Carbon Dioxide — The Gas of Life
URL: link
|
STORY AT-A-GLANCE Carbon dioxide (CO2) is commonly mischaracterized as a harmful waste product of respiration and is falsely blamed for disrupting the planetary climate CO2 is an essential gas necessary for life. Moreover, its impact on Earth’s temperatures is negligible, and will remain negligible even if the current concentration in the atmosphere were to double. A 100% increase of CO2, from 400 ppm to 800 ppm, would decrease radiation into space by just 1.1%, resulting in a 0.7 degree C increase of the average earth temperature A 0.7 degree C difference means there’s no climate emergency, and no matter what we do to reduce CO2 emissions, it’s not going to impact global temperatures. To fabricate an emergency where there is none, it is assumed that massive positive feedbacks are involved. However, most natural feedbacks are negative, not positive, so isn’t it likely the 0.7 degree C increase is an overestimation to begin with There’s no single temperature of the Earth. It varies by location and altitude. For every kilometer of altitude, you have an average cooling of 6.6 degrees C Higher CO2 levels will green the planet, making it more hospitable to plant life. The more CO2 there is, the better plants and trees grow. CO2 also reduces the water needs of plants, reducing the risks associated with droughts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXJ7UZjFDHU The video above, “CO2, The Gas of Life,” features a lecture given at the Summit Old Guard Meeting in New Jersey, October 3, 2023, by William Happer, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of physics at Princeton University and former scientific adviser to the Bush and Trump administrations. The topic: carbon dioxide (CO2), commonly mischaracterized as a harmful waste product of respiration and a pollutant that is disrupting the planetary climate. As explained by Happer in this lecture, CO2 is actually an essential gas necessary for life. Moreover, its impact on Earth’s temperatures is negligible, and will remain negligible even if the current concentration in the atmosphere were to double. CO2 Is Not a Pollutant (SNIP) More CO2 Will Green the Planet As explained by Happer, more CO2 will green the planet, making it more hospitable to plant life. The more CO2 there is, the better plants and trees grow, so if we want lush forests and bountiful harvests, cutting CO2 is the last thing we’d want to do. “All plants grow better with more CO2 [in the air],” he says. “Plants are really starved [of] CO2 today. We know plants need many essential nutrients. They need nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium; most important of all they need water. But they also need CO2, and like many of the other nutrients, CO2 today is in short supply.” CO2 benefits plants by reducing their water needs, hence less risk from drought. Higher CO2 levels also reduce harmful photorespiration. According to Happer, C3-type plants lose about 25% of their photosynthesis potential due to increased photorespiration. For more in-depth information about the role of CO2 in plant growth and photosynthesis, please view the video. This discussion begins around the 40-minute mark. Lies, Ignorance, Stupidity or Something Else? In closing, Happer makes an effort to explain what’s driving the climate hysteria: “In spite of incontrovertible arguments that there is no climate emergency — CO2 is good for the Earth — the campaign to banish CO2, ‘net zero,’ has been very successful. So, how can that be? I’m really out of my depth here because now I'm talking about human nature. I'm really good with instruments and with solving differential equations but I'm not very good at understanding human beings. But here are some of the drivers: noble lies, political lies, ignorance, stupidity, greed. Noble lies goes back to Plato who discusses it in ‘The Republic.’ ‘In politics, a noble lie is a myth or untruth, often, but not invariably of a religious nature, knowingly propagated by an elite to maintain social harmony or to advance an agenda.’ And here there's a clear agenda. If you could somehow unite mankind to fight some external threat, for example CO2 pollution, then we won't fight each other. There won't be wars. So, I think many sincere people have latched on to the CO2 narrative partly for that reason. You can actually read about it in the early writings of the Club of Rome. Then there are political lies. This is one my favorite H.L. Menken quotes: ‘The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.’” Ignorance, of course, is widespread, and largely based on incomplete knowledge or a flawed understanding of the facts. And what of stupidity? Dietrich Bonhoeffer, one of the few German clergymen who opposed Hitler and eventually paid for his public dissent with his life, once wrote about human stupidity: “Against stupidity we have no defense. Neither protest nor force can touch it. Reasoning is of no use. Facts that contradict personal prejudices can simply be disbelieved — indeed, the fool can counter by criticizing them, and if they are undeniable, they can just be pushed aside as trivial exceptions. So the fool, as distinct from the scoundrel, is completely self-satisfied. In fact, they can easily become dangerous, as it does not take much to make them aggressive. For that reason, greater caution is called for than with a malicious one.” Happer himself has experienced the danger of opposing stupidity. “I regularly get phone calls threatening me, my wife and children with death,” he says. “So, what kind of movement is this?” Lastly, greed. A.S. Pushkin once said, “If there should happen to be a trough, there will be pigs.” And climate science is currently where the big bucks are — provided your work furthers the global warming narrative and the need for net zero emissions. Whatever the drivers are, responsible people everywhere need to push back against the false climate change narrative and the net zero agenda, as it will accomplish nothing in terms of normalizing temperatures, but will rapidly erode quality of life and the sustainability of food production, and shift wealth into the hands of the few. |
Responses:
[18995] [18987] [18988] [18989] [18990] [18991] [18998] [18986] [18997] [19002] [19001]
18995
From: georg, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Carbon Dioxide — The Gas of Life
|
it is the methane spewing out of the "permafrost" that is the big worry ... methane is many times greater green house gas than any other ... the train has left the station ... we need more plants to produce enough oxygen to breath ... dig? |
Responses:
None
18987
From: pamela, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Carbon Dioxide — The Gas of Life
|
Apr 11, 2023 'What Percent Of Our Atmosphere Is CO2?': Doug LaMalfa Stumps Entire Panel With Climate Questions |
18988
From: pamela, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Carbon Dioxide — The Gas of Life
|
About CO2 Coalition The CO2 Coalition was established in 2015 as a 501(c) (3) for the purpose of educating thought leaders, policy makers, and the public about the important contribution made by carbon dioxide to our lives and the economy. The Coalition seeks to engage in an informed and dispassionate discussion of climate change, humans’ role in the climate system, the limitations of climate models, and the consequences of mandated reductions in CO2 emissions. About Us In carrying out our mission, we seek to strengthen the understanding of the role of science and the scientific process in addressing complex public policy issues like climate change. Science produces empirical, measurable, objective facts and provides a means for testing hypotheses that can be replicated and potentially disproven. Approaches to policy that do not adhere to the scientific process risk grave damage to the economy and to science. |
18989
From: pamela, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Carbon Dioxide — The Gas of Life
|
Climate Facts Explore our extensive library of facts and detailed data to empower yourself with knowledge, educate friends and family, and join us in our love for CO2. Explore the Facts Take The Climate Quiz |
18990
From: Chuckles, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Carbon Dioxide — The Gas of Life
|
Really like that link, very descriptive! Just watched this video in the link provided, pretty common sense peer reviewed science. |
18991
From: pamela, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Carbon Dioxide — The Gas of Life
| 👍🪔Thanks Chuckles |
Responses:
[18998]
18998
From: Chuckles, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Carbon Dioxide — The Gas of Life
| You're welcome! |
Responses:
None
18986
From: Redhart, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Mercola: CT/low cred/pseudoscience/quackery
|
Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information; therefore, fact-checking and further investigation is recommended on a per article basis when obtaining information from these sources. See all Conspiracy- Pseudoscience sources. Overall, we rate Mercola.com a Quackery-level pseudoscience website that sometimes advocates for dangerous, inaction or action, to serious health issues. Detailed Report Bias Rating: PSEUDOSCIENCE Factual Reporting: LOW Country: USA Press Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE Media Type: Website Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY |
18997
From: Curly Bear, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Those Idiots...!
|
Dr. Mercola always BACKS-UP any claim(s) he makes with scientific research, and he cites his Sources and References at the end of each article. Anyone can read them, and come to their own conclusion -- instead of relying "someone else" to do their thinking and evaluation for them. Any 'verification source' (in this case MediaBiasFactCheck.com) who concludes that a person or scientific research is "Quackery-level pseudoscience" had damn well better provide PROOF of their very biased conclusion. Just yelling out across the Internet (and expecting people accept such a bogus claim as Absolute Proof) does not constitute any kind of verifiable "proof". Obviously, the website's claim of "Quackery-level pseudoscience" is an outright, boldface lie. Hence, the folks who run MediaBiasFactCheck.com demonstrate that they have zero integrity. Redhart, shame on you for sharing that outright lie! For heaven's sake, do your OWN research. If you still disagree with the article/claim in question, then state WHY you disagree with it. This at the very least opens up the lines of communication and discussion. But don't just blithely post such a bombastic lie. Come on, Redhart, you're SO much better than that. I enjoy reading your posts and I've never once doubted your integrity or your intelligence, nor do I now; I just figured you had an "off" day. |
19002
From: Awen, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Those Idiots...!
|
Do you read the sources? I have. Sometimes, he summarizes well. Most often, the claims the sources make are not nearly as specific, or different claims altogether, that Mercola twists in his own direction. Sometimes, what he states is the direct opposite of the conclusions Mercola draws. I don't dismiss Mercola entirely, but I absolutely do check out the sources he provides to make sure they are actually vetted sources AND that they're making the same claims he is. Occasionally things match up. Most of the time they don't. That's the psychology of it. Posting sources doesn't mean the sources have actually been used, or used as intended, but it makes the reader think so. It makes a fool of any reader that doesn't do the follow up research (which starts with checking the sources Mercola himself provides, that he knows the vast majority of people are going to take at face value rather than actually looking them up and reading them). I can make all the false claims in the world and paste a list of sources at the end to make it look legit, sources that might say the exact opposite. But if people don't read them, just the presence of words on a page that look like pretty citations is enough to "legitimize" what I say in most people's eyes. That's one of the most basic scams in the book. |
Responses:
None
19001
From: Redhart, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Those Idiots...!
|
lol that's been the Q/CT cry, "do your own research!"...and when we do, they claim foul. fascinating. You have a right to your opinion, old friend. Have a good day. |
Responses:
None
[ Envirowatchers ] [ Main Menu ]