| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 146337 | 2018-07-07 06:40:00 | I'm Sorry ... | B.M. (505) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1451291 | 2018-07-11 06:31:00 | Ian Plimer's geological qualifications are pretty impressive, he must know his stuff, otherwise he would not have got to where he is. The same could be said of the late Bob Carter who did work with New Zealand geologists. But Plimer and Carter are also well known as Climate Change deniers who have used their academic records to throw clouds of dust into the climate change debate. Why this is so is anyone's guess, but I could speculate. Geologists Know All About the earth, the atmosphere is part of the earth environment, so if you are a geologist with a contrarian inclination you could ask, who are all these johnny-come-lately climate scientists telling us that human activity is changing the atmosphere and with it the climate? Why don't people ask ME? This is classic Dunning-Kruger effect thinking where, because you know a bit in one area, that qualifies you to make pronouncements in a different area, not realising that the knowledge you have does not cover the field you are having a crack at. Climate change is the one area where this process has been running riot for the last couple of decades - we even have a couple of examples on this very forum. Plimer's statements about CO2 are nonsense - except about it being necessary for life. But we know about photo-synthesis so there is no revelation there. The issue today is not that there is CO2 in the atmosphere, it is that there is -too much- CO2. The excess does not come from volcanic eruptions (volcanoes have been erupting since the earth was a peanut). The CO2 concentration has been, and is being, measured. It is an observation, not a theory. The increase matches the amount of coal, oil and gas that have been extracted from the earth and burnt as fuel. The measured increase cannot be attributed to volcanoes. As a matter of interest, radiocarbon dating was indicating increasing CO2 levels long before global warming became an issue. This is because increasing fossil carbon dilutes the atmospheric radiocarbon being constantly generated by cosmic rays, and is known as the Suess Effect, identified in the 1950s. It shows the increase began at the time of the Industrial Revolution when large quantities of coal, and later oil, started to be burnt by the industrial nations. I won't spend any more time on the rest of Lurking's post except to repeat something I wrote before: Global Warming and Climate Change are actually different things linked by a cause and effect relation. Global Warming causes Climate Change. Lots of other things can cause climate change as well, but today global warming (which is being caused by us) is what is important. The science has identified global warming and now the world has to terms with the resulting climate change. |
Jayess64 (8703) | ||
| 1451292 | 2018-07-11 07:34:00 | Also Plimmer might be a so called expert but he has a massive conflict of interest with his mining connections. | gary67 (56) | ||
| 1451293 | 2018-07-11 20:45:00 | The issue today is not that there is CO2 in the atmosphere, it is that there is -too much- CO2. Ok, one thing at a time, how do you explain this? "Carbon dioxide is one of the essential ingredients in green plant growth, and is a primary environmental factor in greenhouses. CO2 enrichment at 2, 3 or 4 times natural concentration will cause plants to grow faster and improve plant quality." HERE (www.google.co.nz 3.0.9.9.0.504.5439.2-10j5j1j1.18.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..12.27.6093.6..0i67k1j35i39k1.273.IGW_fxeuNGc) Are you suggesting we should put all plants on a crash diet and try and starve them to death? :) |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1451294 | 2018-07-11 23:13:00 | Ok, one thing at a time, how do you explain this? "Carbon dioxide is one of the essential ingredients in green plant growth, and is a primary environmental factor in greenhouses. CO2 enrichment at 2, 3 or 4 times natural concentration will cause plants to grow faster and improve plant quality." HERE (www.google.co.nz 3.0.9.9.0.504.5439.2-10j5j1j1.18.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..12.27.6093.6..0i67k1j35i39k1.273.IGW_fxeuNGc) Are you suggesting we should put all plants on a crash diet and try and starve them to death? :) It seems simple enough. If you build a sealed greenhouse and enhance the interior CO2 levels, plants grow faster. What's to explain? What does it have to do with global warming? Think carefully before you answer. |
Jayess64 (8703) | ||
| 1451295 | 2018-07-11 23:42:00 | Subject: Fw: Try this on for size!!! Change-CO2 Could this be the TRUTH about GLOBAL WARNING/CLIMATE CHANGE. C'mon guys - we often sit in this very forum and wonder how people could fall victim to telemarketing scams, click on stupid links and get infected with viruses and the like - yet you are actually reading that "Forward from Grandma" style email and thinking that it's the truth? Go ahead, re-read the article and ask yourself, "Does this sound like it has been written by a scientist?" It reeks of email forwards that claim each person eats 8 spiders per year and all the rest of that crap. Now back to the story of the 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo, scientists have estimate that it was releasing somewhere in the figures of 250 million tons of CO2 per day into the atmosphere: volcanoes.usgs.gov Depending on where you read, but the estimates for how much CO2 humans are producing per year is somewhere in the figure of 40 billion. Doesn't take a mathematician to realise that: 250 million * 4 (days) != 40 billion. While I will not get bogged down on the climate change is true/false claim, at least do yourselves due service and fact check your emails/articles that have zero citations (just mentioning some famous person's name is not enough) before you go claiming them as scientific proof or whatever. Stephen Hawking was quoted saying, "... my scientific research has shown that in the centre of the moon is a giant diamond with a phallic shape" ^^ See how easy that was? |
Bozo (8540) | ||
| 1451296 | 2018-07-12 01:12:00 | It seems simple enough. If you build a sealed greenhouse and enhance the interior CO2 levels, plants grow faster. What's to explain? What does it have to do with global warming? Think carefully before you answer. You’re right, it is simple enough. It means that plants, as a whole, would enjoy and prosper on higher levels of CO2. Up to four times the existing levels of CO2 we’re told. Then there is the evidence that in the past the plant world have dealt with Volcanic Eruptions, Bush Fires, Burn-off’s and the like. If you’ve ever seen a Bush Fire, like they have in Australia and America, you would swear the whole world would be choked to death. However, the alarmist Greens see fit to place this photo of a Power Station belching smoke on their Webpage. 8932 Problem is the Chimneys are Cooling Towers, and the Smoke, Water Vapour, which completely destroys their creditability. Oh, and further food for thought. Did you know there are over 5000 known active volcano’s under the sea all belching CO2? What steps should we take with them? I can’t see any sort of Tax fixing the problem! |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1451297 | 2018-07-12 01:55:00 | [QUOTE=B.M.;1278542]You’re right, it is simple enough. It means that plants, as a whole, would enjoy and prosper on higher levels of CO2. Up to four times the existing levels of CO2 we’re told.] Ah, now I get it. I see why you rail against those who want to stop global warming . You are standing up for the right of plants to have access to unlimited CO2 so they can grow and reach their full potential. "Today the lawn, tomorrow the world", that sort of thing. Well, good for you, I suppose someone has to do it. If you have visions of giant broccoli roaming free across the plains at least that's better than not having a vision at all. I wish you luck. |
Jayess64 (8703) | ||
| 1451298 | 2018-07-12 02:53:00 | Incidentally I quite agree with you about those pictures of cooling towers. They're rather silly and quite irrelevant. | Jayess64 (8703) | ||
| 1451299 | 2018-07-12 03:05:00 | [QUOTE=B.M.;1278542]Ah, now I get it. I see why you rail against those who want to stop global warming . You are standing up for the right of plants to have access to unlimited CO2 so they can grow and reach their full potential. What Global Warming? I thought that floated out the window with “Climategate”. But you’re right about me being on the plants side, however, you seem to have overlooked the fact that trees would get to a huggable size much quicker with additional CO2. |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1451300 | 2018-07-12 05:19:00 | I was talking to a younger Green friend who was concerned about the images of ice floes calving we've been seeing recently. I took a certain amount of pleasure in giving him a science lesson about how melting ice does not affect the volume of the liquid it is floating in. Pity some of our idiot journalists don't go back to school or at least reacquaint themselves with some basic principles of science. I'm reminded about the financial market collapse in the 80's. Remember the images we were bombarded with of the money market "experts" panicking and shouting "sell!" at every opportunity? These "experts" barely out of school at worst, or undergraduates at best, causing untold damage and heartache particularly to mum and dad investors, some of whom lost small fortunes? All because these "experts" were emulating the chaotic scenes of the NYSE and others - because they didn't have the experience to realise what they were copying really didn't have too much application here and we were by and large insulated from the causes. But of course, then our news media dutifully followed the flock, feeding the frenzy ... |
WalOne (4202) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 | |||||