GW causing tidal flooding in Florida...no worries.

[ClosedCaption]

The theory was proposed and proven through experimentation. Life, plant life in this case, has learned to take advantage of co2, to thrive. Introducing excess co2 into our environment is like injecting steroids into plant life. They grow twice as big and twice as fast. Further you'll find the additional co2 will result in additional o2, which will make animals grow faster and bigger as well, but that's just my random theory I don't know if anyone has tested effects of excess o2 on animals.

not according to science. Maybe now you're using your gut

Climate myths: Higher CO2 levels will boost plant growth and food production - environment - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist

Show me where anyone says more CO2 is better for plants across the board. You cant because its not true. At least, according to science

I've read the link you posted. It agrees with what I said 100%, though it downplays the effects by switching gears to talk about yield. Then it goes off on a tangent proposing that the good effects may not apply to "all" plant yields and "may" cause harm due to "possible" acidity of the ocean. IOW the link is attempting to disprove facts by making baseless suppositions.

The first paragraph is this:

According to some accounts, the rise in carbon dioxide will usher in a new golden age where food production will be higher than ever before and most plants and animals will thrive as never before. If it sounds too good to be true, that's because it is.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I know it must be difficult to tear away from the glowarm cult/religion. They even had to change the name of it.

Yes they just changed the name of it Captain America. 40 years ago.

Is that when moynihan was telling nixon, in the early 70s, that we must act to stop glowarm or the earth temps will increase by 7 degrees and new york and DC will be under water by the year 2000? Lol. Complete gullible loonbats.

I dont know was Moynihan a scientist? Either way now that you know you can stop saying they just changed the name because its been that way for 40 years and you are late to the party

 

[Luddly Neddite]

You do know that plants breathe co2, don't you? You do know that plants exhale O2 right?

You do understand that without plants we'd run out of o2, right?

You do understand that the higher the amount of co2 the more plants we'll have and the bigger they will grow and the less water they will need as well right?

Yes Yes

Yes

You do know that we are cutting down vast amounts of trees that would usually clean our air tho right? And some of the GW plans is planting trees right? Right?

That still doesnt show that CO2 is good for you fuck face or you would be huffing your exhaust pipe right now.

Listen, moron, I said plants breathe co2 and that is why co2 is good for us. We exhale co2. Saying co2 is bad for us is equivalent to saying breathing is bad for the environment. It's beyond moronic.

Yes, planting trees is good, cutting down forests is bad. But cow shit and cow farts are good for the environment, comprende? Cycle of life. Learn it.

OMG.

Flunked out of 6th grade General Science, didn't you.

Damn frightening that anyone is THIS ignorant.

 

[RKMBrown]

Oh ok, since we are removing those trees then you realize there is less recylcing of CO2 as well correct? Or this is where you jump off the logic train?

Let me get this straight, I say planting trees is good, and cutting down forests is bad. And in response you think I said planting trees is bad, and cutting down forests is good.

You are confusing two separate issues. Destroying forests is one issue, and I don't know anyone arguing that we should be doing that. Punishing animal life to spite animal life for breathing and excreting the food that plant life needs to recover from said destruction of forests is another issue, and the main problem intelligent people have with this global warming witch hunt.

No I didnt say that...I'll jsut copy and paste it for you:

Oh ok, since we are removing those trees then you realize there is less recylcing of CO2 as well correct?

You acknowledge we are cutting down the CO2 recyclers (aka trees) but still think this has no effect on cleaning our air? Or less trees mean nothing? what?

Listen, moron. I said planting trees is good, cutting down forests is bad. What part of that statement keeps confusing you? The prime effect of more co2 is more plant growth. That humans are cutting down trees is a separate issue that nature has learned to address through plant growth. For example, when volcanoes erupt they generate more co2 than mankind has or will ever cause. Yet here were are.

 

[Little-Acorn]

The libs will be paralyzed by severe brain lock.

And this will be different from the way they normally are, how.....??

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Yes Yes

Yes

You do know that we are cutting down vast amounts of trees that would usually clean our air tho right? And some of the GW plans is planting trees right? Right?

That still doesnt show that CO2 is good for you fuck face or you would be huffing your exhaust pipe right now.

Listen, moron, I said plants breathe co2 and that is why co2 is good for us. We exhale co2. Saying co2 is bad for us is equivalent to saying breathing is bad for the environment. It's beyond moronic.

Yes, planting trees is good, cutting down forests is bad. But cow shit and cow farts are good for the environment, comprende? Cycle of life. Learn it.

Oh ok, since we are removing those trees then you realize there is less recylcing of CO2 as well correct? Or this is where you jump off the logic train?

Its hard to know where to begin with that degree of ignorance but he also doesn't understand that too much of anything can kill.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The oxygen, nitrogen, and CO2 levels were vastly different in the Triassic and Jurassic periods yet plant and animal life still thrived. CO2 was 5x higher during that period due to massive super volcanoes and subduction yet life still thrived.

Because we are just like Dinosaurs and plants is your angle?

Also, according to what the CO2 levels were different? Science or your gut? Because you keep quoting science but when I quote science you dismiss it for your gut and I'm trying to understand how you go with one or the other. Do you go eenie meany miney moe? Random? What?

CO2 has to reach 30,000 ppm to be considered deadly. CO2 was approx 1500 ppm when the dinosaurs roamed. It wouldnt have been the CO2 that killed us back then. Are you saying dinosaurs werent carbon based?

According to what the CO2 was that level? Politcally driven scientists?

 

[Yurt]

[MENTION=25032]ClosedCaption[/MENTION]

I dont typically respond to drive by posts such as these when you dont have a point. Plus why are you showing science graphs when you dismiss science?

i don't dismiss science. and the point of the graphs is quite clear to anyone with more than two brain cells.

global climate change, whether cooling or warming, has been occurring long before man had any impact on the planet.

but i know that doesn't fit your fear and superstition so you will dismiss them because it is actually you who hate science.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Let me get this straight, I say planting trees is good, and cutting down forests is bad. And in response you think I said planting trees is bad, and cutting down forests is good.

You are confusing two separate issues. Destroying forests is one issue, and I don't know anyone arguing that we should be doing that. Punishing animal life to spite animal life for breathing and excreting the food that plant life needs to recover from said destruction of forests is another issue, and the main problem intelligent people have with this global warming witch hunt.

No I didnt say that...I'll jsut copy and paste it for you:

Oh ok, since we are removing those trees then you realize there is less recylcing of CO2 as well correct?

You acknowledge we are cutting down the CO2 recyclers (aka trees) but still think this has no effect on cleaning our air? Or less trees mean nothing? what?

Listen, moron. I said planting trees is good, cutting down forests is bad. What part of that statement keeps confusing you? The prime effect of more co2 is more plant growth. That humans are cutting down trees is a separate issue that nature has learned to address through plant growth. For example, when volcanoes erupt they generate more co2 than mankind has or will ever cause. Yet here were are.

Why are avoiding my question? I didnt ask you whether planting trees was good or not...I asked

Since we are removing those trees then you realize there is less recylcing of CO2 as well correct?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Listen, moron, I said plants breathe co2 and that is why co2 is good for us. We exhale co2. Saying co2 is bad for us is equivalent to saying breathing is bad for the environment. It's beyond moronic.

Yes, planting trees is good, cutting down forests is bad. But cow shit and cow farts are good for the environment, comprende? Cycle of life. Learn it.

Oh ok, since we are removing those trees then you realize there is less recylcing of CO2 as well correct? Or this is where you jump off the logic train?

Its hard to know where to begin with that degree of ignorance but he also doesn't understand that too much of anything can kill.

Right! Air and Water is good but you dont see people welcoming Tsunamis and Hurricanes

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Yes they just changed the name of it Captain America. 40 years ago.

Is that when moynihan was telling nixon, in the early 70s, that we must act to stop glowarm or the earth temps will increase by 7 degrees and new york and DC will be under water by the year 2000? Lol. Complete gullible loonbats.

I dont know was Moynihan a scientist? Either way now that you know you can stop saying they just changed the name because its been that way for 40 years and you are late to the party

Thanks for that revelation but the climate has been changing for billions of years.

 

[ClosedCaption]

[MENTION=25032]ClosedCaption[/MENTION]

I dont typically respond to drive by posts such as these when you dont have a point. Plus why are you showing science graphs when you dismiss science?

i don't dismiss science. and the point of the graphs is quite clear to anyone with more than two brain cells.

global climate change, whether cooling or warming, has been occurring long before man had any impact on the planet.

So?

but i know that doesn't fit your fear and superstition so you will dismiss them because it is actually you who hate science.

Warming and cooling has been happening. Ok, what about it sparky?

 

[RKMBrown]

Yes Yes

Yes

You do know that we are cutting down vast amounts of trees that would usually clean our air tho right? And some of the GW plans is planting trees right? Right?

That still doesnt show that CO2 is good for you fuck face or you would be huffing your exhaust pipe right now.

Listen, moron, I said plants breathe co2 and that is why co2 is good for us. We exhale co2. Saying co2 is bad for us is equivalent to saying breathing is bad for the environment. It's beyond moronic.

Yes, planting trees is good, cutting down forests is bad. But cow shit and cow farts are good for the environment, comprende? Cycle of life. Learn it.

OMG.

Flunked out of 6th grade General Science, didn't you.

Damn frightening that anyone is THIS ignorant.

Nope. Straight As. And no it's not frightening how ignorant he is. I'm used to it.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Is that when moynihan was telling nixon, in the early 70s, that we must act to stop glowarm or the earth temps will increase by 7 degrees and new york and DC will be under water by the year 2000? Lol. Complete gullible loonbats.

I dont know was Moynihan a scientist? Either way now that you know you can stop saying they just changed the name because its been that way for 40 years and you are late to the party

Thanks for that revelation but the climate has been changing for billions of years.

Was this Moynihan guy a scientist? Because I'm talking about scientists

 

[ClosedCaption]

Listen, moron, I said plants breathe co2 and that is why co2 is good for us. We exhale co2. Saying co2 is bad for us is equivalent to saying breathing is bad for the environment. It's beyond moronic.

Yes, planting trees is good, cutting down forests is bad. But cow shit and cow farts are good for the environment, comprende? Cycle of life. Learn it.

OMG.

Flunked out of 6th grade General Science, didn't you.

Damn frightening that anyone is THIS ignorant.

Nope. Straight As. And no it's not frightening how ignorant he is. I'm used to it.

Why did you say the artcle agreed with you when it didnt? And why when I asked for proof that more CO2 will be great for plants you replied with no proof?

I mean the first was a flat out lie, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt on the second. Where's that proof bro?

 

[Yurt]

I dont typically respond to drive by posts such as these when you dont have a point. Plus why are you showing science graphs when you dismiss science?

i don't dismiss science. and the point of the graphs is quite clear to anyone with more than two brain cells.

global climate change, whether cooling or warming, has been occurring long before man had any impact on the planet.

So?

but i know that doesn't fit your fear and superstition so you will dismiss them because it is actually you who hate science.

Warming and cooling has been happening. Ok, what about it sparky?

can you read?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

I dont know was Moynihan a scientist? Either way now that you know you can stop saying they just changed the name because its been that way for 40 years and you are late to the party

Thanks for that revelation but the climate has been changing for billions of years.

Was this Moynihan guy a scientist? Because I'm talking about scientists

I know your little game. Its either troll bucketing along or obfuscation. I have to give you excellent marks in both. Lol.

 

[ClosedCaption]

i don't dismiss science. and the point of the graphs is quite clear to anyone with more than two brain cells.

global climate change, whether cooling or warming, has been occurring long before man had any impact on the planet.

So?

but i know that doesn't fit your fear and superstition so you will dismiss them because it is actually you who hate science.

Warming and cooling has been happening. Ok, what about it sparky?

can you read?

Yes warming and cooling has been happening in the past care to tie that in to what that has to do with Global warming at all or nah?

 

[RKMBrown]

No I didnt say that...I'll jsut copy and paste it for you:



You acknowledge we are cutting down the CO2 recyclers (aka trees) but still think this has no effect on cleaning our air? Or less trees mean nothing? what?

Listen, moron. I said planting trees is good, cutting down forests is bad. What part of that statement keeps confusing you? The prime effect of more co2 is more plant growth. That humans are cutting down trees is a separate issue that nature has learned to address through plant growth. For example, when volcanoes erupt they generate more co2 than mankind has or will ever cause. Yet here were are.

Why are avoiding my question? I didnt ask you whether planting trees was good or not...I asked

Since we are removing those trees then you realize there is less recylcing of CO2 as well correct?

Everyone knows that a dead tree can't convert co2 to o2. Why do you think you have to make that statement again and again and again in response to my statement that everyone knows cutting down trees is bad?

The effect of less trees is also more co2, the effect of more co2 is more growth. I've cut down 100s of trees on my ranch over the last 10years, I have more trees now than I did ten years ago.

Some folks just can't see past single events to understand cause and effect over time. I'm pretty good at playing chess. I'm good cause I can see many moves into the future. Let go your fear and recognize that we can let the cut down forests grow back and we can breathe fresh air even if it does get a bit warmer. It gets to 115 degrees sometimes here in TX and we don't die. Relax.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Thanks for that revelation but the climate has been changing for billions of years.

Was this Moynihan guy a scientist? Because I'm talking about scientists

I know your little game. Its either troll bucketing along or obfuscation. I have to give you excellent marks in both. Lol.

No, I'm wondering why you are bringing up what Moynihan thinks when we are talking about science and scientists? Were you attempting to make this about something other than science?