It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by edsinger
Well all this talk is well presented for both sides of the question, I have but a simple one..
around 1300 AD they were growing olives in Germany, how could this be? There were no Coal Plants then.
Originally posted by Muaddib
And you can drown from too much water too melatonin...what is your point?...
Perhaps the scientists and people like yourself who claim CO2 is a pollutant should spent money on starting a space program to find a planet where there is no CO2.... maybe after you spend a couple days there and find no food whatsoever you might have a different view on CO2.....
Originally posted by Essan
................
No doubt you'll argue that the high CO2 levels at that time were a consequence of the higher temps, not a cause.
But if so, how come current CO2 levels are today 30% higher than during recent periods - such as the Holocene Climatic Optimum (Hypsithermal) c8,000 years ago - in when global temps were warmer? Surely then CO2 levels should have been higher than today?
Originally posted by Essan
But what happens if the temp does not change but a lot more CO" s suddenly released into the atmosphere? Say, as result of a clathrate gun going off (methane hydrate release)? The extra CO2 increases the greenhouse effect and causes global warming. Until such time as natural systems return things back to normal.
Originally posted by Essan
But how do we know that had it not been for the increase CO2 (where did it come from? Volcanoes maybe?) that the ice age of the time wouldn't have been even more severe? Maybe the CO2 caused the ice age to come to an end? (Remember for the Ordovician we're talking accuracy of dates to 'within a few million years' - and the current period of glaciations have only been going on for less than 3 million years)
Originally posted by Essan
Besides, if CO2 follows temperature, how can CO2 increase during an ice age?
Originally posted by MischeviousElf
.............
wELL DONE MATE VOICE OF MODERATION AND WISDOM AMOUNGST THE SPIN AND LIES.... anyhow
Originally posted by MischeviousElf
To be honest cant be bothered to discuss with the same people who always quote the same research which is dubiously based and have a personal agenda of some type.
Originally posted by MischeviousElf
I just cant understand many posters who try and use the "look at what these (usually Exxon funded) guys have to say.
Originally posted by MischeviousElf
No over a very long period from that point as evolution took over and living organisms started evolving different respiration (at a cell level) responses to the environment and slowly very slowly lots and lots and lots of generations of these living things changed our atmosphere from one that had hardly any Oxygen in it to one that is composed now of around a 20 ish percent oxygen level.
Originally posted by MischeviousElf
So since when did humans stop being a factor.
Originally posted by MischeviousElf
Lets look for another thing causing it, like Einstein said
“lets change the facts to fit the theory”
Originally posted by MischeviousElf
continued from previous page
because people believed the spin from a few not the facts from the experts like the IAEA and Hans Blick. Scarely this is much more of a risk and issue to our safety and security than he could have ever been.
Originally posted by Athenion
Thank you for so perfectly demonstrating why debating the issue of global warming is becoming completely pointless. There are no fact, no rationality, no level headed debate. It's kini of like the debate over 9/11. Name calling, terrible logic, and stupidity abound.
Originally posted by Athenion
Hey, Mauddib, too much oxygen can be poisonous. I guess according to your logic we should eliminate all oxygen, or perhaps search for a planet that is oxygen free. I couldn't imagine a more assanine arguement or accusation.
Originally posted by Athenion
No one is stating that CO2 shouldn't exists. What we are talking about it balance, having the right amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. Not too much, not too little. No one said anything about none at all. It's unfortunate that this kind of vitriolic ignorance makes this yet another issue that we can no longer come to these boards to have a rational discussion about.
Originally posted by Muaddib
The EPA has named CO2 as a pollutant, and there are members who are agreeing with the EPA claim which is why I made that statement...
Originally posted by Muaddib
Balance according to who's definition?... Your definition of balance?... You think Earth will follow your definition of balance?...
There is no such thing as "balance"...the Earth's climate changes, and these changes have many times brought the extinction of many species...
Are you going to try to stop every natural factor because you want the Earth to stay in what you call a "balanced state"?....
Originally posted by Muaddib
BTW, in case you haven't noticed, don't expect respect when you don't offer none...
Originally posted by Athenion
..................
If we were creating so much oxygen it was killing the environment, then oxygen would be listed as a pollutant as well. I guess the concept of moderation is beyond you, and only extremes, either all or none, is reality.
Originally posted by Athenion
Balance in the sense of what nature has in mind, not what humans are adding on top of nature's already violent cycles.
Originally posted by Athenion
I don't know how many more times I can say it, but what we want to do is reverse the small amount that humans are adding on top of the already heating environment.
Originally posted by Athenion
You know, stop making it worse than it's already going to be. Is that really such a difficult concept to understand? So instead of ignoring what we're saying by using non-arguements like "Go find a planet with no CO2" or, "You really think nature cares about your opinion", why don't you start listening to what we're saying?
Originally posted by Athenion
Likewise. Save the self rightous indignation for someone else. It's very clear to any outside observer that you seem to be the one incapable of level headed debate.
Originally posted by Muaddib
The Earth has had higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and life was plentyful....
I guess the concept that the Earth has had CO2 levels at 4,000 to 4,400 ppm, right now it is 380ppm, and there was abundant life is "beyond you"....
An increase of 0.01% CO2 over 150 years is not "excessive"... The Earth has have CO2 levels change as much as during the present Climate Change, but at a faster rate and mankind was not around.
Originally posted by Muaddib
So you know what the Earth has in mind? Since the levels of CO2 we have been adding "already existed on Earth" we have not added antyhing that didn't exist before.
Originally posted by Muaddib
The Earth has had higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and life was plentyful....
Originally posted by win 52
What about the co2 data taken from ice core samples in Antartica?
Those records show that we are now living in unprecedented times, as far as high co2 levels are concerned.
Can you prove this data of yours? The ice doesn't lie.
Originally posted by junglelord
We need to switch energy usage either way...so its a no brainer.
Originally posted by Muaddib
A doubling of CO2 will not be catastrophic, there will be changes. But Change is a constant on this planet.