CO2 benefits



The discussion begins around 5:20

This was just posted so it isn't old.

Mr Carlson claims, right off the bat, that we have seen little discussion of the carbon cycle from "alarmists". Allow me to point you to page 79 of the Technical Summary of AR6's Physical Science Basis where a discussion of the carbon cycle begins and continues for more than 25 pages. The carbon cycle is mentioned or discussed at hundreds of spots in this document.

1688918399167.png


I have to run some errands. I will get back to this in a bit.

Carlson's warning that he was going to ramble on about CO2 and photosynthesis for almost two hours is not the most enticing invite I've ever heard. I am familiar with photosynthesis.
 
Last edited:
Mr Carlson claims, right off the bat, that we have seen little discussion of the carbon cycle from "alarmists". Allow me to point you to page 79 of the Technical Summary of AR6's Physical Science Basis where a discussion of the carbon cycle begins and continues for more than 25 pages. The carbon cycle is mentioned or discussed at hundreds of spots in this document.

View attachment 802782

I have to run some errands. I will get back to this in a bit.
It's a long podcast so take your time. I have it on in the background
 
It's a long podcast so take your time. I have it on in the background
I have skipped through it. I am familiar with photosynthesis and what happens when you increase CO2 levels. Unfortunately, that will not compensate for the harm caused by raising the Earth's temperature by several degrees.

Have you looked at "The Physical Science Basis"?
 
I have skipped through it. I am familiar with photosynthesis and what happens when you increase CO2 levels. Unfortunately, that will not compensate for the harm caused by raising the Earth's temperature by several degrees.

Have you looked at "The Physical Science Basis"?
nice opinion, too bad it aint fact
 
nice opinion, too bad it aint fact
The video? It's factual for the most part. But I saw no discussion whatsoever about greenhouse warming or what would actually be involved in shifting agriculture towards the poles.
 
The video? It's factual for the most part. But I saw no discussion whatsoever about greenhouse warming or what would actually be involved in shifting agriculture towards the poles.
bullshit

just about everything you post, say, quote, and think is pure bullshit, and without a link you can not articulate a damn thing about CO2 and the Heavy Industry that is what you call clean.
 
bullshit

just about everything you post, say, quote, and think is pure bullshit, and without a link you can not articulate a damn thing about CO2 and the Heavy Industry that is what you call clean.
You don't seem to be following the conversation. Did you watch the video in the OP? That'd be a start.
 
I have skipped through it. I am familiar with photosynthesis and what happens when you increase CO2 levels. Unfortunately, that will not compensate for the harm caused by raising the Earth's temperature by several degrees.

Have you looked at "The Physical Science Basis"?
No

What about the papers he cited where increased co2 was actually beneficial in the experiments?
 
Well we don't have that problem. We have an idiot problem. From not properly tending dead overgrowth to unattended camp fires to cigarettes to fireworks then finally lightning which falls back on overgrowth
I bet you that a drastic weather change can enhance the fire risk a lot faster than the forestry service can tend to the dead and dying overgrowth.

Everyone admits that increasing temperatures will increase the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. Did you ever think that some of that water comes from America's forests?
 

Forum List

Back
Top