CO2 buildup accelerating in atmosphere

The truth needs to get out. The world has to change its focus from CO2 gas reduction to hydrogen dioxide reduction now as it is proven to be the largest source of greenhouse gas!
This little known fact is just starting to leak out. The people that hold this secret knowledge don't want it to be exposed for fear of worldwide panic and chaos. I even fear for my personal safety releasing this info but I feel it is my duty for the good of mankind.
Don't panic! I am sure our loving world leaders will do the right thing and save us all....??... *! Maybe they should institute another tax? Ya that will work!


www.usatoday.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

It's gonna go up before it comes down because long term we want it all to come down but right now we don't want to pay extra for energy. So we'll wait until renewables become (comparatively) cheap enough and wreck the planet at an ever accelerating rate in the meantime.

Good. This will accelerate grow of plants on earth.

All of you global warming doomers, go back worshipping Gore.

has reached record-high levels

BS. It has been MUCH higher many times in the past.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by Vitchilo]

reply to post by freeusfromthematrix


Are you friggin' kidding me? You fear for your life? I guess the people at USA TODAY should also.

If the 3 particles out of 1 MILLION are enough to affect the temperature why is the warming STOPPED over the same past year where this SKYROCKETING CO2 levels are?

reply to post by freeusfromthematrix


Agreed, there just isn't enough media attention given to the horrible effects of excess Dihydrogen monoxide - especially in the atmosphere.

I can't even begin to fathom the numbers of people indirectly killed by the effects this stuff has on the Human body and our biosphere as a whole. Horrendous. Something must be done and soon.

A tax - That is not nearly enough. We need more than that.

I say that Martial Law should be declared until we can figure out a way of safely disposing this stuff, at first efforts will have to be made to limit exposure. Only then can the real work begin.

We really have to put some thought into preserving things for future generations. This bourgeoisie lifestyle must come to an end. We must save something for our children.

Truth Tell - I admire your courage. I was just to cowardly to put out what really needed to be done to stop this scourge on our environment.
Environmentalist organizations worldwide should be recruiting you as a spokesperson for their cause.

"Good. This will accelerate grow of plants on earth."
Not in the upper atmosphere it wont.
C02 needs to be near the plants this just goes straight up away from them.
How can a plant feed on C02 in the upper atmosphere?


The dihydrogen monoxide hoax involves listing negative effects of water under an unfamiliar scientific name, then asking individuals to help control the seemingly dangerous substance (caused by most people knowing the word "monoxide" as part of the name of the poisonous gas "carbon monoxide"). The hoax is designed to illustrate how the lack of scientific knowledge and an exaggerated analysis can lead to misplaced fears.[1] Dihydrogen monoxide, shortened to DHMO, is a scientific name for water that, while technically correct, is almost never employed.

The hoax was created by Eric Lechner, Lars Norpchen and Matthew Kaufman, housemates while attending UC Santa Cruz in 1990,[2] revised by Craig Jackson in 1994,[3] and brought to widespread public attention in 1997 when Nathan Zohner, a 14-year-old student, gathered petitions to ban "DHMO" as the basis of his science project, titled "How Gullible Are We?"[4]

Hydrogen dioxide a thick, colorless liquid, H2O2, resembling water, but having a bitter, sour taste, produced by the action of acids on barium peroxide. It decomposes into water and oxygen, and is manufactured in large quantities for an oxidizing and bleaching agent. Called also oxygenated water.

I'm trying to see the logic, we're trying to cut Co2 emissions because the government is drilling it into our heads that it's important, even though there is no direct evidence that it is. On the other hand we have a hole in the ozone layer caused by cows and sheep farting, yet nobody cares about that because cows and sheep are tasty.

Mmm.

reply to post by unnamedninja


PCBs, CFCs and Dioxins etc are banned for a reason. They are bad and cause Ozone depletion. They just don't cause as much damage as the three Nuclear Bombs the United States Detonated in the Atmosphere over Antarctica in 1953 as part of operation Isabella.... No, that had absolutely nothing to do with the Gigantic Hole over Antarctica.

It had to be cows and animals farting. They must be contained, we cannot sustain their detrimental effect on the environment. They are so prolific.



[edit on 19-8-2008 by TruthTellist]

Try to point out absurdity by being absurd?

According to the EPA the principal greenhouse gasses that enter the atomosphere because of human activity are Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), Nitrous Oxide (N2O), and Fluorinated Gases.

EPA - Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The dihydrogen monoxide hoax? Please grow up. It is water.

reply to post by Interestinggg


I know the whole thing... I made 2 years of chemistry and I was aware of the whole ``Let's ban water`` thingee.

CO2 ``human caused pollution`` isn't important... if it's real at all. There's thousands of problems more important than that. And if the goal of the environuts would be to save the planet, they would do something about it instead of calling for government control of everyone, which is FASCISM and their way of doing it, restricting confort, life, children, is against common sense and a mix of communism, serfdom and fascism.

Dropping nerve gas in oceans, doing genetic manipulations, OGM, nuclear testing, biological weapons development, wars, famine... it's much worse for us and the earth than the BS CO2 scam. Even by the own UN reports, we only contribute to less than 15% of the whole thing... we're nothing.

Interestinggg - I am insulted you are insinuating that I am trying to start a new Hoax. Is this based on your observation that I have simply misrepresented an inert gas that breaks down to water and oxygen as poison that destroys our atmosphere.
The fact is CO2 is not a poison but is a gas that is necessary for life on this planet. Maybe the real hoax is co2 and not "The dihydrogen monoxide hoax"

Originally posted by freeusfromthematrix

Interestinggg - I am insulted you are insinuating that I am trying to start a new Hoax. Is this based on your observation that I have simply misrepresented an inert gas that breaks down to water and oxygen as poison that destroys our atmosphere.
The fact is CO2 is not a poison but is a gas that is necessary for life on this planet. Maybe the real hoax is co2 and not "The dihydrogen monoxide hoax"

I simply looked up the compound you were speaking of and found that information.That it has been part of some hoax.It was not to insult anyone.

C02 is poisonous to humans, why do you think we expel it when we breath out?
Because it is toxic to us.It is a by product of toxins we make in our body, plus there is some of it in the oxygen we breath in.
When my mother died from emphasaemia, her c02 level was 490.
Normal is around 30.And she still lived clinged to life without life support for 4 hours, but then ultimately it killed her brain.She had signed a DNR order.
It "kills" human beings.
To say c02 is not poisonous to humans is silly.
More C02 on this planet means more C02 in the oxygen.
And with the rate they are "removing" forests, which usually soak it up, what would you suggest my great grandchildren breath?
This planet has its own dilution system for C02/02 mix.
The more C02 produced makes it harder to dilute.

reply to post by Interestinggg


Some people seem to think "denying ignorance" means getting a MOD to place the words [HOAX] next to the title of a thread...

Why don't you start contributing something positive for once, instead of always putting us down?

We don't need your scorn and derision. This is a serious Issue.

Time for some facts again:

From the original article, www.usatoday.com...


So the research station showing the drastic rise in CO2 levels sits atop Mauna Loa. Now lets have a look at Mauna Loa itself:

From: volcano.wr.usgs.gov...

(all emphasis in the above two reports are mine)

So we learn here that Mauna Loa is producing background gases. I ask you, what is the single most common background gas produced by a volcano? Carbon dioxide.

If, as is insinuated in the article, the CO2 level is the same phenomena that is being touted by those of Al Gore's ilk, then we would expect a population center to be located close to the observatory. Any quick search on the demographics of Hawaii will show immediately that the population is centered closer to Oahu, the island which is home to Honolulu. The population on the big island of Hawaii, where Mauna Loa and the observatory is located, is very low. This would further suggest that any atmospheric buildup of CO2 observed is coming from a source other than people.

Of course, any gas released would, over time, dissipate itself throughout the atmosphere in general. This dispersal would be relatively slow, however, and would still reveal a higher concentration closest to the source for quite some time. I know of no physical laws that would place a higher concentration of any gas in an area that was not near the source. So let us examine the area around Hawaii. Outside the populous island of Oahu, we have: ocean. No automobiles, no factories, no human population of any kind, for hundreds upon hundreds of miles in any direction, with the possible exception of whatever ships are passing through. Compare that with an area such as Los Angeles, Tokyo, London, Paris, New York... any large city on mainland where industry exists in abundance. Why, I must ask, are observatories in these locations not reporting a similar (or greater, as would be expected if the CO2 was man-made) phenomena?

The answer, the only reasonable answer, is that this is simply a CO2 leak from within the volcano. It hs nothing to do with Kyoto, fossil fuels, or human population. It has everything to do with natural forces within the earth.

So I say, let's make volcanoes illegal.

TheRedneck

reply to post by TheRedneck


"So I say, let's make volcanoes illegal"

Right On!

What we should really do is tax the countries that have Volcanoes living on them. This wuld be the most effective route IMO.

Those things cause so much Damage to the Environment that we cannot ignore them. This sort of things demands an immediate financial response of epic magnitude.

I highly doubt people living in Vulcanized nations care about the effects their volcanoes are having on the rest of us. I for one am quite sick of their inaction. It about time that the compensated the rest of the world for their negligence in this regard. Despicable.

I am glad you mentioned this - it is about time someone had the courage and stand up to discuss the serious issues that are negatively affecting our planet and killing the children and destroying their future.

The UN should use force to implement this policy. The honour system, just isn't working.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by TruthTellist]

reply to post by Interestinggg
Whoops, need more facts:

C02 is poisonous to humans, why do you think we expel it when we breath out?
Because it is toxic to us.It is a by product of toxins we make in our body, plus there is some of it in the oxygen we breath in.

Almost any substance in sufficient quantities can be toxic. An excess of water without the proper electrolytes can be fatal. But at levels in today's atmosphere (387 ppm), CO2 is not toxic. The toxicity level begins, for those most sensitive to it, at 10,000 ppm.

When my mother died from emphasaemia, her c02 level was 490.
Normal is around 30.And she still lived clinged to life without life support for 4 hours, but then ultimately it killed her brain.She had signed a DNR order.

I am truly sorry for your loss. But emphysema cuased her death, not CO2. Emphysema damages the tissues in the lungs that allow chemical transfers of oxygen and CO2 into and out of the blood stream. Her CO2 level probably was that high, because your own body produces CO2 as a byproduct of 'burning' sugars (food) for energy. Your mother could not exhaust the CO2 due to the disease, which caused her blood to contain a higher than normal concentration. She could also not absorb oxygen, by the same process.

It was not the CO2 that killed her, it was a lack of oxygen.

It "kills" human beings.
To say c02 is not poisonous to humans is silly.

If CO2 was poisonous to humans, we would all be dead. It has existed in our atmosphere as long as life has existed on the planet, and depending on the era, at higher and lower levels than today.

More C02 on this planet means more C02 in the oxygen.

Earth's atmosphere is not primarily oxygen. It is primarily (78%) nitrogen. There is oxygen in it (22%), and there is CO2 in it (0.0387%), as well as trace amounts of water vapor, sulfur dioxide (poisonous at low levels), assorted nitrates (harmful at low levels), helium, argon, and a cornucopia of other gases.

Therefore, more CO2 does not 'pollute' our oxygen. If anything, our oxygen (which is a strong corrosive/oxidizer) is polluting the nitrogen-based atmosphere at levels over 500 times as great as CO2.

And with the rate they are "removing" forests, which usually soak it up, what would you suggest my great grandchildren breath?

Trees are not the only plants which 'scrub' CO2 from the air. Anything green does that as well. I am with you on keeping a healthy population of trees (I personally own 90 acres of virgin forest where I live), but I wouldn't get too upset over limited deforestation. Increased levels of CO2 are directly linked with increased growth in plant life of all kinds, creating a self-sustaining system.

This planet has its own dilution system for C02/02 mix.
The more C02 produced makes it harder to dilute.

Again, it is not dilution, but absorption. Nothing (save physical dispersion laws) dilutes CO2, but plants do absorb it. And when they do, they provide food for us. If you were to somehow remove all of the CO2 in the atmosphere, all life would die. Plants would simply be unable to grow, leading to a complete breakdown of the food chain.

TheRedneck

reply to post by TruthTellist
But what do we do about those rogue volcanoes in international waters? We have to tax them too! Maybe a special UN task force?

TheRedneck