Where Does CO2 Come From?

jwoodie

Platinum Member
Aug 15, 2012
19,742
8,514
940
Where Does the Carbon Dioxide Really Come From?
Professor Ian Plimer could not have said it better!
If you've read his book you will agree, this is a good summary.

PLIMER: "Okay, here's the bombshell. The volcanic eruption in Iceland . Since its first spewing of volcanic ash has, in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet - all of you.

Of course, you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress - it’s that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life. I know....it's very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kids "The Green Revolution" science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of abroad, nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your 50 cent light bulbs with $10.00 light bulbs.....well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just four days.

The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in just four days - yes, FOUR DAYS - by that volcano in Iceland has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud at any one time - EVERY DAY.


I don't really want to rain on your parade too much, but I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on earth.

Yes, folks, Mt Pinatubo was active for over One year - think about it.

Of course, I shouldn't spoil this 'touchy-feely tree-hugging' moment and mention the effect of solar and cosmic activity and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and cooling cycle, which keeps happening despite our completely insignificant efforts to affect climate change.
And I do wish I had a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud, but the fact of the matter is that the bush fire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year.

Just remember that your government just tried to impose a whopping carbon tax on you, on the basis of the bogus 'human-caused' climate-change scenario.
Hey, isn’t it interesting how they don’t mention 'Global Warming'
Anymore, but just 'Climate Change' - you know why?
It’s because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming bull artists got caught with their pants down.

And, just keep in mind that you might yet have an Emissions Trading Scheme - that whopping new tax - imposed on you that will achieve absolutely nothing except make you poorer.
It won’t stop any volcanoes from erupting, that’s for sure.
But, hey, relax......give the world a hug and have a nice day!"
 
I'm afraid your numbers are simply wrong. Humans emit 100 times more CO2 than do volcanoes. The point you ought to be making is how little our efforts to date have accomplished. The atmospheric level of CO2 and other greenhouse gases are all still climbing and the rate at which they are climbing is actually increasing.

But volcanoes are, essentially irrelevant. You should check Scopes before you post things that look like huge revelations that seem to have eluded everyone else. There's likely a good reason they're aren't being shouted from the rooftops.
 
Although the initial carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of the young Earth was produced by volcanic activity, modern volcanic activity releases only 130 to 230 megatonnes of carbon dioxide each year,[19] which is less than 1% of the amount released by human activities (at approximately 29 gigatonnes).[20]

[19] Gerlach, T.M. (4 June 1991). "Present-day CO2 emissions from volcanoes". Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union (American Geophysical Union) 72 (23): 249, 254–5. Bibcode:1991EOSTr..72..249.. doi:10.1029/90EO10192.

[20] U.S. Geological Survey, "Volcanic Gases and Their Effects", volcanoes.usgs.gov

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth's_atmosphere#Sources_of_carbon_dioxide
 
According to the voice of the deniers, CO2 comes from H2O. :rofl::lmao:

April 3, 2007
RUSH: Mark my brilliant words on this... The vast majority of CO2 that's in the atmosphere comes from water vapor.
 
The error in thinking here is understandable.. The guy in the OP confused CO2 with CARBON.

Clearly he did.. He talked about ASH.. But I understand that. Our own political leaders and EPA do the same thing on PURPOSE. As part of the plan to confound CO2 with pollution..
 
I don't really want to rain on your parade too much, but I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on earth.

That must be the reason for the huge spike in 1991 on this Co2 Graph

co2_data_mlo.png



The statement doesn't even stand up to the most basic scrutiny.
 
Last edited:
Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

THis fucking idiot doesn't even think the Sun is composed mostly of Hydrogen
Plimer probably didn't expect an astronomer to review his book. I couldn't help noticing on page120 an almost word-for-word reproduction of the abstract from a well-known loony paper entitled "The Sun is a plasma diffuser that sorts atoms by mass". This paper argues that the sun isn't composed of 98 per cent hydrogen and helium, as astronomers have confirmed through a century of observation and theory, but is instead similar in composition to a meteorite.
 

2012 AMS Information Statement on Climate Change


The following is an AMS Information Statement intended to provide a trustworthy, objective, and scientifically up-to-date explanation of scientific issues of concern to the public at large.

Background

This statement provides a brief overview of how and why global climate has changed over the past century and will continue to change in the future. It is based on the peer-reviewed scientific literature and is consistent with the vast weight of current scientific understanding as expressed in assessments and reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, and the U.S. Global Change Research Program. Although the statement has been drafted in the context of concerns in the United States, the underlying issues are inherently global in nature.


How is climate changing?

Warming of the climate system now is unequivocal, according to many different kinds of evidence. Observations show increases in globally averaged air and ocean temperatures, as well as widespread melting of snow and ice and rising globally averaged sea level. Surface temperature data for Earth as a whole, including readings over both land and ocean, show an increase of about 0.8°C (1.4°F) over the period 1901─2010 and about 0.5°C (0.9°F) over the period 1979–2010 (the era for which satellite-based temperature data are routinely available). Due to natural variability, not every year is warmer than the preceding year globally. Nevertheless, all of the 10 warmest years in the global temperature records up to 2011 have occurred since 1997, with 2005 and 2010 being the warmest two years in more than a century of global records. The warming trend is greatest in northern high latitudes and over land. In the U.S., most of the observed warming has occurred in the West and in Alaska; for the nation as a whole, there have been twice as many record daily high temperatures as record daily low temperatures in the first decade of the 21st century.
 
The error in thinking here is understandable.. The guy in the OP confused CO2 with CARBON.

Clearly he did.. He talked about ASH.. But I understand that. Our own political leaders and EPA do the same thing on PURPOSE. As part of the plan to confound CO2 with pollution..

I don't think there was any thinking at all. It's a parrot post. That's a line of argument you hear regularly from denialist pundits that the dittoheads repeat without ever checking to see if they're being fed a line.
 

Forum List

Back
Top