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 01-05-2017, 10:34 AM
 
17,273 posts, read 9,556,326 times
Reputation: 16468

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
The whole cycle that is in play... we produce carbon dioxide, and plants absorb it... the plants produce oxygen and we take that in... that is straight from God. No man created that. It wasn't some random act of explosive creation. The scientists were able to see the process and explain it, but God implemented it.
Nope, no god.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-05-2017, 10:37 AM
 
23,971 posts, read 15,075,178 times
Reputation: 12949
Wonder when developers will start building on that garbage and plastic island the size of Texas out in the Pacific?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2017, 11:12 AM
 
78,382 posts, read 60,566,039 times
Reputation: 49653
I've decided to take global warming seriously and am now rooting for Yellowstone to blow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2017, 11:12 AM
 
13,684 posts, read 9,006,517 times
Reputation: 10405
For those wondering, here is a more complete article featuring the co-author:


Plants are ramping up photosynthesis, helping absorb all our carbon dioxide | Public Radio International


One point I found especially interesting is Mr. Keenan's observation that as the global atmosphere warms, it actually opens up areas for plants to grow (higher elevations). Of course, such is somewhat offset, I imagine, by loss of vegetation at the lower elevations due to excessive heat and drought (and of course, de-forestation).


One thing I wonder about: the article seems to be arguing that the carbon dioxide rate in the atmosphere held steady from 2002 to 2014, which he was attributing to plants 'ramping up' to try to take care of said excess carbon dioxide.


Of course, correlation is not necessarily causation. Some countries (including the US of A) have been attempting to limit such 'greenhouse' gases for two decades or more. I would think (of course, I do not know) that the flat-rate of growth of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could be both to human efforts and plant efforts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2017, 11:33 AM
 
59,029 posts, read 27,290,738 times
Reputation: 14274
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile View Post
Uh, what? First, not made by god as god doesn't exist. You should change your title. Second, you know about the devastation of the rainforests & impending consequences, right? Maybe you don't as you seem to think the work of vegetation is a new phenomenon. Wow. I'll just leave it at that & shake my head.
"as god doesn't exist"

When you make a claim, you have to prove it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2017, 11:34 AM
 
20,716 posts, read 19,357,373 times
Reputation: 8281
What a huge surprise. Yeah plants need CO2. Below 150 PPM most of them die especially C3 plants. Ironically it may be a boon for plants since humanity arrived since otherwise carbon is trapped in the earth crust over time. However if CO2 will not kill us all, politician and monopolists can't save us.

CO2 Science
[SIZE=4][SIZE=2]Lootens and Heursel (1998) reported that two Phalaenopsis hybrids grown at an atmospheric CO[SIZE=1]2[/SIZE] concentration of 950 ppm exhibited net photosynthetic rates that were over 80% greater than those displayed by control plants grown at 350 ppm CO[SIZE=1]2[/SIZE]. Similarly, pineapple plants grown at 700 ppm CO[SIZE=1]2[/SIZE] exhibited photosynthetic rates that were more than 80% [/SIZE][/SIZE]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2017, 11:35 AM
 
20,716 posts, read 19,357,373 times
Reputation: 8281
Quote:
Originally Posted by crone View Post
Wonder when developers will start building on that garbage and plastic island the size of Texas out in the Pacific?

You mean work on a real problem in the environment?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2017, 11:42 AM
 
Location: West Texas
2,366 posts, read 1,646,794 times
Reputation: 2561
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile View Post
Uh, what? First, not made by god as god doesn't exist. You should change your title. Second, you know about the devastation of the rainforests & impending consequences, right? Maybe you don't as you seem to think the work of vegetation is a new phenomenon. Wow. I'll just leave it at that & shake my head.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefragile View Post
Nope, no god.
You're right. As long as you deny God's existence, he doesn't exist for you.

As far as changing the thread's title, why should he? Are you not for freedom of speech?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2017, 11:44 AM
 
17,273 posts, read 9,556,326 times
Reputation: 16468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horizonite View Post
You're right. As long as you deny God's existence, he doesn't exist for you.

As far as changing the thread's title, why should he? Are you not for freedom of speech?
Because it's factually incorrect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2017, 02:35 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,535 posts, read 37,132,711 times
Reputation: 13999
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
Regarding the bold... ... not happening.

Here's some more from the Berkley Lab if you want to look into it...

People think religion and science are at odds - not really. Because when the scientists are honest, like in this case, they admit they don't have a clue why this is occurring - which is OK. They should simply make observations, take further readings and honestly come to their conclusions.
And yet atmospheric CO2 continues to climb.... https://robertscribbler.files.wordpr...ng?w=600&h=469 Don't you think that is a bit strange?

November 2015: 400.24 ppm

January 4, 2016: 402.20 ppm

November2016: 403.64 ppm

January 4, 2017: 405.20 ppm

https://www.co2.earth/
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