More climate change propaganda

More climate change propaganda

Debates

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Insanity at Masada

tinyurl.com/mw7txe34

Joined
23 Aug 04
Moves
26660
27 Sep 14

Originally posted by wolfgang59
I think you are joking.

Decay, decomposition, bacterial action. Ultimately its back to CO2.

There are some Carbon sumps but food isn't one!
Where did petroleum come from?

Joined
31 Aug 06
Moves
40565
27 Sep 14

Originally posted by whodey
I concede that living organisms have some effect on the never changing weather. For example, dino's created more cabon emissions than humans. Did their passing gas kill them all off? I've not heard a scientist suggest this, yet they expect me to believe we will kill ourselves doing much of the same?
Do you ever stop to read what you've written, think it through, before you hit post?

Organisms have an effect on the never changing weather?

Are you also seriously suggesting that scientists believe human farts are responsible for climate change?

Really? 😕

Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48793
29 Sep 14
1 edit

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Where did petroleum come from?
It did - and still does - come out of the ground.

It was created by large amounts of dead sea creatures being covered
by sediment and therefore deprived of oxygen they did not decompose
in the normal way (and release their Carbon). Under heat and pressure
the gooey mess became crude-oil, further heat and pressure produces
natural gas (I think). The process took Carbon out of the Carbon Cycle
and reduced atmospheric CO2.

I think that's about right but will concede that's just a Primary
School Teacher's take on it! There are plenty of bright sparks
here who will correct me. 😀

Die Cheeseburger

Provocation

Joined
01 Sep 04
Moves
78285
29 Sep 14

Originally posted by wolfgang59
It did - and still does - come out of the ground.

It was created by large amounts of dead sea creatures being covered
by sediment and therefore deprived of oxygen they did not decompose
in the normal way (and release their Carbon). Under heat and pressure
the gooey mess became crude-oil, further heat and pressure produces
natural gas (I think). ...[text shortened]...
School Teacher's take on it! There are plenty of bright sparks
here who will correct me. 😀
So there was a time in the past when all that CO2 was in the atmosphere?

Die Cheeseburger

Provocation

Joined
01 Sep 04
Moves
78285
29 Sep 14
1 edit

Originally posted by wolfgang59
I think you are joking.

Decay, decomposition, bacterial action. Ultimately its back to CO2.

There are some Carbon sumps but food isn't one!
I believe the question was: Does man contribute to CO2 in the atmosphere regardless of fossil fuels. I agree that once a human is living and breathing they are part of their own cycle, consume carbon in their food release CO2 in their breath, round and round.

Do you think all tree and plant matter is returned to the atmosphere through decomposition and insects?

I contend that through agriculture (regardless of fossil fuels) and mans ability to inhabit more and more of the worlds barren areas or through congregating in cities in very dense populations each new human adds their own CO2 'bank' to the atmosphere.

The only reasonable argument against this that each human removes other critters from the equation and thus balances out or that the human population of the world is static (clearly not the case).

Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48793
29 Sep 14

Originally posted by Wajoma
I contend that through agriculture (regardless of fossil fuels) and mans ability to inhabit more and more of the worlds barren areas or through congregating in cities in very dense populations each new human adds their own CO2 'bank' to the atmosphere.

You can contend what you like but you are wrong.

This is very simple science - easy to check out on the internet so I'll finish
this lesson here.

Die Cheeseburger

Provocation

Joined
01 Sep 04
Moves
78285
29 Sep 14
1 edit

Originally posted by wolfgang59
You can contend what you like but you are wrong.

This is very simple science - easy to check out on the internet so I'll finish
this lesson here.
Well I did say 'reasonable argument' and it appears you have none.

Edit: Wolfgang stands in front of his class. Todays lesson - "Look on the internet".

w

Joined
02 Jan 06
Moves
12857
29 Sep 14
1 edit

Originally posted by C Hess
Do you ever stop to read what you've written, think it through, before you hit post?

Organisms have an effect on the never changing weather?

Are you also seriously suggesting that scientists believe human farts are responsible for climate change?

Really? 😕
Well that's just it. Scientists seem concerned about cows farting, but not humans. Shrug.

Contrary to popular belief, I'm no fart expert like Al Gore is. 😠

Joined
31 Aug 06
Moves
40565
29 Sep 14

Originally posted by whodey
Well that's just it. Scientists seem concerned about cows farting, but not humans. Shrug.
They're concerned about cows farting because the sheer number of cows we breed these days actually increase methane levels substantially:

http://m.ibtimes.com/cow-farts-have-larger-greenhouse-gas-impact-previously-thought-methane-pushes-climate-change-1487502

Under normal (non-industrial) conditions cattle wouldn't reproduce this ferociously, and so their farting wouldn't be more than a nuisance to a bystander.

And by the way, if you're not knowledgeable on cows farting and its effects, why would you even bring it up as an argument in a discussion?

Die Cheeseburger

Provocation

Joined
01 Sep 04
Moves
78285
29 Sep 14

Originally posted by C Hess
They're concerned about cows farting because the sheer number of cows we breed these days actually increase methane levels substantially:

http://m.ibtimes.com/cow-farts-have-larger-greenhouse-gas-impact-previously-thought-methane-pushes-climate-change-1487502

Under normal (non-industrial) conditions cattle wouldn't reproduce this ferociously, and so the ...[text shortened]... on cows farting and its effects, why would you even bring it up as an argument in a discussion?
What do you think 'normal conditions' are for humans?

K

Germany

Joined
27 Oct 08
Moves
3118
29 Sep 14

Originally posted by Wajoma
Do you think all tree and plant matter is returned to the atmosphere through decomposition and insects?
Almost all of the carbon in it, yes.

Joined
31 Aug 06
Moves
40565
29 Sep 14

Originally posted by Wajoma
What do you think 'normal conditions' are for humans?
I don't know, but I doubt we have an effect on climate change through our flatulent activities.

It should be noted that it's not actually the cows farts that's the biggest problem, but when they burp and exhale. That's when they release the most methane into the atmosphere. I just learned that. Fascinating.

n

The Catbird's Seat

Joined
21 Oct 06
Moves
2598
29 Sep 14

Originally posted by Wajoma
I believe the question was: Does man contribute to CO2 in the atmosphere regardless of fossil fuels. I agree that once a human is living and breathing they are part of their own cycle, consume carbon in their food release CO2 in their breath, round and round.

Do you think all tree and plant matter is returned to the atmosphere through decomposition and in ...[text shortened]... nd thus balances out or that the human population of the world is static (clearly not the case).
Populations will not remain totally static. The problem is that third world countries contribute the most to population growth, and are unmanageable in terms of the global warming agenda.

n

The Catbird's Seat

Joined
21 Oct 06
Moves
2598
29 Sep 14

Originally posted by C Hess
I don't know, but I doubt we have an effect on climate change through our flatulent activities.

It should be noted that it's not actually the cows farts that's the biggest problem, but when they burp and exhale. That's when they release the most methane into the atmosphere. I just learned that. Fascinating.
I agree with your points, but also that there is small chance at all that humans can or will control either CO2 or the climate.

Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48793
30 Sep 14

Originally posted by normbenign
I agree with your points, but also that there is small chance at all that humans can or will control either CO2 or the climate.
The population per se is not the problem - its consumerism.

http://cotap.org/per-capita-carbon-co2-emissions-by-country/?gclid=CjwKEAjwhqShBRDS95LciqqaonISJADj1rgaCC-PTJJCqqj08hoh2ZR_wdxhMqpFu5RGE-_aiWaCaxoC3T3w_wcB