Originally posted by links234
If we are contributing, even if it's less than China, shouldn't we still do something? Shouldn't we take the lead rather than sit idly by waiting for
China to play along too? I believe we'd stand on much better ground if we could move the discussions to, "We've done our part, now do yours."
I'm not suggesting a carbon tax is the answer, I'm not suggesting anything is the be-all-end-all answer. I'd just like a reasonable agreement on what
is happening and then we can move onto what to do about it.
Why do you even think that humans can "change or mitigate the climate"?... What is this "we are God" attitude that people like you have believing you
can control the climate, and the universe in general?...
There is no proof whatsoever that mankind activities are the cause for Climate Change, NONE.
What people like you don't know, or understand is that some scientists and Universities under the patronage of governments are already sequestering
atmospheric CO2, and this is a BIG problem.
I know about it because I was offered a job in one such research team when I was living in Wyoming. It seems that they sent similar emails to other
people with computer and or electronic engineering experience like I have. Back then I made a report about it on the forums, but before that
contacted my Senators and representatives, only one responded back and what he told me was that "we need to compromise with the AGW camp even if they
are wrong", and that was it.
The problem with sequestering atmospheric CO2 is that once you start there is no magic switch to stop it, and by the time it is stopped it will be
already too late. Not to mention that lowering atmospheric CO2 will lower the harvest yields worldwide.
You see, all plants, trees, and in general green biomass need atmospheric CO2, alongside some life forms, and when the atmospheric CO2 reaches a
certain level plants, trees, and other green biomass's growth is stunted, which will mean even less harvests/food for us humans.
It is a known fact that most plants, trees and green biomass benefit with even HIGHER atmospheric CO2 content than exists now in our atmosphere, in
fact optimum levels of atmospheric CO2 for most plants, trees and other green biomass is between 1,200-1,500 ppm, and right now the levels are about
Successful indoor growers implement methods to increase CO2 concentrations in their enclosure. The typical outdoor air we breathe contains 0.03 -
0.045% (300 - 450 ppm) CO2. Research demonstrates that optimum growth and production for most plants occur between 1200 - 1500 ppm CO2. These
optimum CO2 levels can boost plant metabolism, growth and yield by 25 - 60%.
There are other benefits of having higher levels of atmospheric CO2 than at present, for example.
Benefits to Plants
Literally thousands of laboratory and field experiments have conclusively demonstrated that enriching the air with carbon dioxide stimulates
the growth and development of nearly all plants. They have also revealed that higher-than-normal CO2 concentrations dramatically enhance the
efficiency with which plants utilize water, sometimes as much as doubling it in response to a doubling of the air's CO2 content. These
CO2-induced improvements typically lead to the development of more extensive and active root systems, enabling plants to more thoroughly explore
larger volumes of soil in search of the things they need. Consequently, even in soils lacking sufficient water and nutrients for good growth
at today's CO2 concentrations, plants exposed to the elevated atmospheric CO2 levels expected in the future generally show remarkable increases in
vegetative productivity, which should enable them to successfully colonize low-rainfall areas that are presently too dry to support more than isolated
patches of desert vegetation.
Elevated levels of atmospheric CO2 also enable plants to better withstand the growth-retarding effects of various environmental stresses,
including soil salinity, air pollution, high and low air temperatures, and air-borne and soil-borne plant pathogens. In fact, atmospheric CO2
enrichment can actually mean the difference between life and death for vegetation growing in extremely stressful circumstances. In light of these
facts, it is not surprising that Earth's natural and managed ecosystems have already benefited immensely from the increase in
atmospheric CO2 that has accompanied the progression of the Industrial Revolution; and they will further prosper from future CO2 increases.
Higher levels of atmospheric CO2 in our atmosphere will mean that plants, trees, etc will grow more, produce more yields, and use LESS water, leaving
more water for humans and animals.
We are having problems with potable water all around the world, and sequestering atmospheric CO2 will exacerbate the problem even more, not to mention
that it will cause worse famines worldwide.
We also know for a fact, and despite deforestation, that because atmospheric CO2 levels have been increasing the planet has gotten "greener."
And again, the main question is, if there was irrefutable proof that anthropogenic CO2 is the main factor, or even a major factor behind the ongoing
Climate Change, why in the heck do the AGW scientists have had to lie, post/publish false information, delete raw temperature data so that it can't be
verified, try to silence any scientist who dares even question AGW, among other dirty tactics?...
edit on 22-7-2013 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)