Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-31-2014, 10:25 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,419 posts, read 20,315,673 times
Reputation: 8958

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
Everything with these so-called "scientists" turns out to be "far more than expected" or "far less than expected". It seems they know absolutely nothing about climate change and are just guessing.
They must also know nothing about botany if they thought that rain forests give off CO2! Anyone knows plants absorb CO2 and give off oxygen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-31-2014, 10:29 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,193,867 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
You should learn to read. This isn't about global warming. It's about the benefits of man made CO2. Please try to keep up.
It falls in the same category, and should all be in its own subforum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 10:30 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,193,867 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucky4life View Post
This

In a typical week, there will be 2-3 threads on climate change. The bulk of them are about why someone feels it's all BS (it's cold in my city right now etc), but sometimes they're about why someone thinks it's real (98% of scientists etc). I have found that the people that buy into climate change on CD are often new posters of people that have never participated in a debate about it. The one's that cal BS are the same 15-20 people in every thread. This subject has basically turned into a left vs right thing, which is sad because science shouldn't be a left vs right thing.
Well it is a good thing science doesn't rely on the opinions on a forum site.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 12:30 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,292 posts, read 20,749,540 times
Reputation: 9330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
Only if there are enough trees. Deforestation has resulted in our CO2 buffer zone being compromised. The solution is to replant the forests we've destroyed. That will allow the planet to absorb the CO2 already in the atmosphere. I've been puzzling over why people keep talking about reducing the CO2 footprint (not a bad idea if done preemptively but we have to process the CO2 we've already released to have an impact here) when large forests are capable of processing massive amounts of CO2. It's not our increased CO2 production that is the problem. Deforestation is a bigger problem.

Yes the rain forests can absorb the CO2 IF they are large enough. Unfortunately, we keep cutting them down. If you want to get rid of a massive amount of CO2 then plant a massive number of large trees and let them grow. We need our forests back. Particularly our rain forests because they grow the fastest and, hence, can absorb more CO2 than other types of forests.

I do believe we have a CO2 problem but I don't think it's emission that is the problem. I think we've rendered the planet incapable of processing CO2 through deforestation. Unfortunately, there is no money in replanting the forests so no one talks about it. There is money to be made in reducing CO2 through technology and money to be made chopping down the rain forests to plant the land so that's what we do. We put a bandaid on a severed vein and ignore that we're still bleeding. The real issue is deforestation not CO2 emissions. If the rain forests are large enough they can absorb the CO2. They are not large enough.
You are absolutely correct! And that is one of the big evils of the AGW hoax. It has totally diverted attention and resources from our real problems such as deforestation and real pollution.

The AGW hoax is not just a costly and annoying movement, but it is also contributing to the destruction of our planet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 12:32 PM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,457,656 times
Reputation: 4243
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post
They must also know nothing about botany if they thought that rain forests give off CO2! Anyone knows plants absorb CO2 and give off oxygen.
I thought the exact same thing when I read it too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 01:19 PM
 
Location: The South
7,480 posts, read 6,264,332 times
Reputation: 13002
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post
They must also know nothing about botany if they thought that rain forests give off CO2! Anyone knows plants absorb CO2 and give off oxygen.
Back in about 1948 when I was in the 5th or 6th grade, we studied this and did an experiment with plants in a CO2 atmosphere. Now the Scientists do a study? We have a problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 02:32 PM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,386 posts, read 35,551,149 times
Reputation: 14692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
You are absolutely correct! And that is one of the big evils of the AGW hoax. It has totally diverted attention and resources from our real problems such as deforestation and real pollution.

The AGW hoax is not just a costly and annoying movement, but it is also contributing to the destruction of our planet.
If we don't fix the rainforest problem, it won't be a hoax. If we are to avoid global warming due to excess CO2 we need to restore the planet's CO2 buffer which is the rain forests. Unfortunately, it may be too late for that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 02:34 PM
 
Location: DC
6,848 posts, read 7,996,763 times
Reputation: 3572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Carbon dioxide emissions help tropical rainforests grow faster: Study shows trees absorb more greenhouse gas than expected

Nasa study shows tropical forests absorb 1.5 billion tonnes of CO2 a year.
Rainforests absorb more than half of CO2 taken up by vegetation globally.
Scientists previously believed tropical forests emitted carbon dioxide.
Researchers claim their findings emphasise the need to protect rainforests from deforestation to help counteract human greenhouse gas emissions.

Read more: Carbon dioxide emissions help tropical rainforests grow faster: Study shows trees absorb more greenhouse gas than expected | Daily Mail Online
More CO2 does not equal more growth
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 02:36 PM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,386 posts, read 35,551,149 times
Reputation: 14692
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post
They must also know nothing about botany if they thought that rain forests give off CO2! Anyone knows plants absorb CO2 and give off oxygen.
You need a disclaimer.... This is true DURING photosynthesis. What do plants do in the dark and after they die?

This is from scienceline

" During their lifetimes, plants generally give off about half of the carbon dioxide CO2, that they absorb, although this varies a great deal between different kinds of plants. Once they die, almost all of the carbon that they stored up in their bodies is released again into the atmosphere."

The rain forests are filled with all kinds of decaying matter that gives off CO2 and I believe that respiration occurs at night which gives off CO2 (someone who studied botany can correct me if I'm wrong here but I seem to recall being taught that plants use Oxygen at night and give off CO2). The question is when all things are considered do they absorb more or give off more. I've always been of the opinion they absorb more while living and that higher levels of CO2 results in faster plant growth but I've never studied botany.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 02:41 PM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,386 posts, read 35,551,149 times
Reputation: 14692
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever View Post
More CO2 does not equal more growth
Maybe not but more growth should equal less CO2. Time to plant rain forests.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:51 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top