Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's a bit unclear to you because you're stupid. You only read it to find things to pick apart and question. It's like attempting to have a reasonable conversation with a spoiled 7-year-old who doesn't want to take a nap. When the CO2 depletes to a certain level, photosynthesis can no longer occur, and plant life dies... followed closely by all other life. This is because the plant life produces oxygen, and without it, the other life can't live. Because CO2 is a natural byproduct of mammal decomposition, in the VERY end, there will be CO2... there will not be people. It's kind of like when someone bleeds to death, and yet, they still have some blood left in their body.
The only question is, as you do, are you going concern yourself with little more than your own well being? *Or do you consider the well being of others as well?
Why do you continue to pull at my heartstrings with your debunked theory? I consider the well-being of people who are trying to put food on the table and keep jobs, over and beyond the well-being of charlatans. I consider the well-being of corporations, businesses and taxpayers, over those who are running around like Chicken Little, screaming "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"
Of course I am reading it to pick it apart. I am also reading it to put it together. It is called critical thinking, you brainless numbnuts.
And it says what I quoted, not a decrease in CO2 but that eventually all it would be is nitrogen and CO2, with a little methane.
You are scanning things to find bullshit interpretations to support your own delusions. Try reading things for undertanding.
I read the article because I posted the article. I know what the entirety of the article says. Life cannot survive on nitrogen, carbon dioxide and methane, therefore, it ceases to exist. What killed it, was the loss of oxygen, from the loss of plant life, which produces oxygen. What kills the plants is lack of carbon dioxide. LACK OF.... not complete absence of! So we find that while you assume you are "critically thinking" what you are actually doing is "struggling with reading comprehension." This is because you are an idiot and can't help it.
It's this same kind of shallow-brained idiocy that makes you believe man's contributions to the atmosphere, effects anything at all, with regard to the climate. This is one of those things that man of the future will get a chuckle out of, that people actually once thought.
Then explain what this means at the end of the article; "By the point at which all life disappears from the planet, we're left with a nitrogen/carbon-dioxide atmosphere with methane being the only sign of active life"
I quoted it. I posted it with my comment. If you can't deal with someone dissagreeing with your post, then don't post.
If you can, respond intelligently and explain why it end that way, so clearly the opposite of what you claim it says.
Interestingly enough, the ones who said that global climate change didn't exist were those who were paid off by the oil companies.
Most of the world scientists state that there is something going on, and if we don't stop it, we're screwed.
But.....................keep thinking that climate change isn't going on....................especially when they have to truck snow into Calgary while Washington DC sees it's worst snow.
Oh yeah.....................Sandy was one of the few hurricanes to hit NYC and the Jersey shore.
No, "most scientists" say no such thing. In fact, I recently read an article in some science rag at the doctors office, which said that something like 89% of scientists dispute AGW theory, in it's entirety. This is where I found the details about what botanical scientists say, regarding how plants were starving for carbon dioxide until about 600 years ago.
Many of the scientists who once believed in AGW, based this on the data... which turned out to be manipulated and erroneous. Scientists form opinions based on data and assume the data is correct. So what the AGW disciples have tried to do, is lay claim to these scientists who once trusted the data, but who now realize it was bunk. The only current scientists who are supporting the theory, are climatologists, most of whom are getting grant money from the government.
As for the weather... I can find plenty of examples of bizarre weather on Earth. The weather simply doesn't care if it happens in New York or Timbuctoo. Thousands, or perhaps tens of thousands of factors are involved when it comes to the weather. However, one factor that has always been a major source of science fiction, is that man can control the weather. We can't! We can invent nuclear weapons, land men on the moon, we can even clone sheep... but we have never been able to find a way to control weather. during WWII the Department of Defense spent untold amounts on secret research into this very thing, and came up empty. Yet, you maintain that we're doing something inadvertently, which is controlling the weather. You do realize, without the data to support the theory, you are espousing something that is pure science fiction?
Interesting................you found one view that you read in a doctor's office and accept it as truth........................
Good to know...............next time I need verification of a theory, remind me to go to the doctor's office to find the truth.
Sorry, but that's even worse than trying to find the truth on the internet.
Are you sure he has the right subscription to the facts?
I doubt it...................
Interestingly enough, the ones who said that global climate change didn't exist were those who were paid off by the oil companies.
Most of the world scientists state that there is something going on, and if we don't stop it, we're screwed.
But.....................keep thinking that climate change isn't going on....................especially when they have to truck snow into Calgary while Washington DC sees it's worst snow.
Oh yeah.....................Sandy was one of the few hurricanes to hit NYC and the Jersey shore.
Really? Limestone is formed in the deep ocean?
Limestone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Go bullshit someone else.
Try using a legitimate source next time dipshit...you know a GEOLOGIC website. You fucking idiots are all the same...lazy, too fucking lazy to do a little tiny bit of research...
"How Does Limestone Form?
Most carbonate rocks were deposited from seawater. These sedimentary carbonate rocks are common on every continent and have formed through most of geologic history; they are still forming today in the tropics as coral reefs and at the bottoms of shallow seas.
Marine limestone forms because seawater has high concentrations of two key dissolved chemicals-calcium (Ca++) and bicarbonate (HCO3-) ions. In the near-surface layer of most oceans, corals, clams, and other sea-dwelling creatures use these two chemicals to make protective shells by combining them to form calcite or "aragonite," which is the same chemical composition as calcite but has a different crystal form.
Limestone: The Calcium Carbonate Chemical Sedimentary Rock
Because you originally said that limestone was formed in deep water. I showed you that it's not.
Evaporation of bodies of water also contributes to the formation of limestone.
It's not the deep ocean that does it dude.
2000002013AD - the year the world will end?
Scientists have set a new date for the end of the world - but it is not for another two billion years.
All animals and plants will vanish from the Earth, which will be inherited by tiny microbes before life disappears completely, a new study suggests.
Ironically, Armageddon is going to arrive as a result of too little, rather than too much, carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Currently experts are trying to find ways to cut levels of the greenhouse gas to prevent global warming running out of control.
But as the Sun ages and grows hotter, greater evaporation and chemical reactions with rainwater will take away more and more carbon dioxide.
In less than a billion years, its levels will be too low for photosynthesising plants to survive, say scientists. When that happens, life as we know it on Earth will cease to exist.
2000002013AD - the year the world will end? - Telegraph
==========================================================
So science is now finding that what will ultimately doom us, is carbon dioxide depletion. I have been reiterating this for years, that carbon dioxide is essential to all plant life. Without it, plants die and can't produce more oxygen, which we need to breathe. Getting rid of Co2, like it's the freaking plague, is not going to solve any problem, it might actually create a more rapid demise, if the above study is true. I mean, when you really think about it, the more CO2 we churn out, the greater head start we have when it starts running out, right? Oh... but what about the "greenhouse effect" ....those evil "greenhouse gasses" are lurking out there, threatening to kill every man, woman and child on the planet, if we don't act now! Well, we also need a greenhouse effect for plants to grow and for us to retain a stable atmosphere. If the greenhouse effect ever stops working, we're toast... literally. There would be nothing to protect us from UV or radiation from space, because the ozone layer is part of the greenhouse effect. It also retains a stable atmosphere on the planet, for the most part. We have occasional shifts which cause violent storms, but nothing like the storms seen on planets with less stable atmospheres.
This quiet revelation about our ultimate demise, is not getting much air play. It's a little embarrassing, after we've spent untold billions chasing the idiotic AGW theory. The EPA looks like a bunch of dunderheads declaring CO2 a "pollutant" in light of the fact that we're all going to die when it's gone. Of course, 2 billion years is a long time, and I speculate that people (if still around) will have completely forgotten about Al Gore and Obama, and this whole AGW nonsense. The chuckleheads of that time will argue that it was 'ancient times' when men worshipped gods and believed in fairy tales. This is generally what we see with chuckleheads, they push for something until they get it, then blame others for the consequences of it. I imagine they will be this way 2 billion years from now as well.
Don't tell me...............lemmie guess.............you've gotten your PHD (Piled Higher and Deeper) from a Crackerjax Box, and you're trying to convince the rest of us.
Come back when you have some actual science under your belt and can discuss things in a logical manner.
Try using a legitimate source next time dipshit...you know a GEOLOGIC website. You fucking idiots are all the same...lazy, too fucking lazy to do a little tiny bit of research...
"How Does Limestone Form?
Most carbonate rocks were deposited from seawater. These sedimentary carbonate rocks are common on every continent and have formed through most of geologic history; they are still forming today in the tropics as coral reefs and at the bottoms of shallow seas.
Marine limestone forms because seawater has high concentrations of two key dissolved chemicals-calcium (Ca++) and bicarbonate (HCO3-) ions. In the near-surface layer of most oceans, corals, clams, and other sea-dwelling creatures use these two chemicals to make protective shells by combining them to form calcite or "aragonite," which is the same chemical composition as calcite but has a different crystal form.
Limestone: The Calcium Carbonate Chemical Sedimentary Rock
Because you originally said that limestone was formed in deep water. I showed you that it's not.
Evaporation of bodies of water also contributes to the formation of limestone.
It's not the deep ocean that does it dude.
The majority of the limestone created is in deep water because in the near shore are too many other sediments like kaolinite and other clay minerals which inhibit the formation of limestone. So, you are incorrect. It requires non turbulent areas for formation. Inland seas are an exception to the rule as are some of the island cays where no clay is present.
You only skim the surface as usual.
Because you originally said that limestone was formed in deep water. I showed you that it's not.
Evaporation of bodies of water also contributes to the formation of limestone.
It's not the deep ocean that does it dude.
The majority of the limestone created is in deep water because in the near shore are too many other sediments like kaolinite and other clay minerals which inhibit the formation of limestone. So, you are incorrect. It requires non turbulent areas for formation. Inland seas are an exception to the rule as are some of the island cays where no clay is present.
You only skim the surface as usual.
Okay.................I'll play along.................I've provided links to disprove you.
Provide links to prove you're right.
BTW..................CO2 doesn't provide the climate for limestone. Prove your point.
Sorry...........but the idiot tried to say that limestone was formed in deep water because there was a lot of CO2.
Limestone doesn't form in deep water.
And CO2 is a gas, not a solid. There is no place on Earth that will keep CO2 as a solid for any kind of significant time.
The ultimate fate of the Earth has nothing to do with CO2. Eventually the Sun will run out of Hydrogen and expand outwards becoming a Red Giant. It will then likely consume the Earth with our final fate being vaporized and slightly raising the Sun's mass and temperature. It is also possible that the expansion will just burn the Earth to a cinder or that the Earth will be flung out of the Solar System, but the most probably fate is Solar consumption. Time's getting short. We only have about five billions years or so to get ready.
Rest assured there will be one last nice day, there will come a time when the atmosphere is blown away, the seas will either be subsumed into the crust or boil away into space, and the last 3 billion years or so of the Earth's existence will pretty much suck for surface-dwelling hairless apes, but that's still about 2 billion years down the road.
Sorry...........but the idiot tried to say that limestone was formed in deep water because there was a lot of CO2.
Limestone doesn't form in deep water.
And CO2 is a gas, not a solid. There is no place on Earth that will keep CO2 as a solid for any kind of significant time.
Again, CO2 is an element, not a gas. On Earth, it is found in gaseous form, but it can also be a solid or liquid, just as any element, depending on various factors. I realize this is an anal point, but it's no more anal than arguing about limestone formation. It appears you are way in over your head when it comes to actual chemistry and geology. This probably explains why you are so easily fooled by AGW alarmists.
Anthropogenic Global Warming was a hypothesis that has been discredited by a series of findings, most notably, that scientists concocted data to support it. I know you are unhappy, but your balloon has popped. It's time to get up out of the floor and stop throwing a temper tantrum. You aren't changing minds, it's not going to be different next week, this is the facts of life you need to face. The more you continue to deny reality on this, the more you just look like a partisan political hack, who simply doesn't want to give up the ghost.
