Why care about CO2?

CEngelbrecht

CEngelbrecht

Registered Senior Member
Somebody told me, that drilled ice cores show that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere around the beginning of the industrial revolution was 280ppm. Today, what with increased consumption of fossil fuels, the number is 400ppm.
I've also been told, that a number above 600ppm CO2 in a work place without proper ventilation will start to give you coordination and concentration issues.
And I've also been told, that if we continue to consume fossil fuels as we have so far, also now that China and India wants to join the consumer party, we'd reach a number of 900ppm CO2.

So my question is... Are we gonna be a planet of zombies when we reach the year 2100?

 
What happens when the Sun warms up by 10% over the next billion years? What happens when the next asteroid hits Earth?
 
CEngelbrecht said:
The Paris accord?
Click to expand...

dif board game completely.
paris accord is just a debat(talking)
the real science is all about computer models of the melting of the ice caps, glaciers, and the precipitation level change.

the paris accord numbers of "talking" was based on the original tempered down lowest variable based on a model by the innitial guess which has been superseeded by the new computer model.
the new computer model has been run and then revised.
the revised version shows an exponential growth factor.
the exponential growth factor has not been calculated or re-vised to the paris accord "talking".

imagine asking for a show of hands at school assembly to ask which students think bullying is always wrong
most children will put their hand up
though that show of hands doesnt actual do anything as most are simply un-informed and simply agreing with the collective social pressure.

the usa is refusing to put its hand up.(thats ok, who really cares anyway, why waste your life shouting at idiots who are not listening AND shouting)

they are effectively having an arguement about something that doesnt actualy do anything just to make it look like they are actually doing something.

meanwhile.. the actual scientists are continuing to work.

soo the paris accord doesnt mean shit.
the new computer model which has exponential growth, also has not factored in the accelerated speed of the glaciers once the ice shelfs have melted.
this requires it to be re-factored and run again.

most of the old materialists spouting off saying climate change is a hoax, know they are going to be dead before it becomes a real issue, so they dont actually care and wish to maintain their power and control and more soo ego and feeling of supremicy and self assurance.

its a bit of a pile of shit when you get into the real stuff.
stay positive.
follow REAL science
 
Last edited:
RainbowSingularity said:
dif board game completely.
paris accord is just a debat(talking)
the real science is all about computer models of the melting of the ice caps, glaciers, and the precipitation level change.

the paris accord numbers of "talking" was based on the original tempered down lowest variable based on a model by the innitial guess which has been superseeded by the new computer model.
the new computer model has been run and then revised.
the revised version shows an exponential growth factor.
the exponential growth factor has not been calculated or re-vised to the paris accord "talking".

imagine asking for a show of hands at school assembly to ask which students think bullying is always wrong
most children will put their hand up
though that show of hands doesnt actual do anything as most are simply un-informed and simply agreing with the collective social pressure.

the usa is refusing to put its hand up.(thats ok, who really cares anyway, why waste your life shouting at idiots who are not listening AND shouting)

they are effectively having an arguement about something that doesnt actualy do anything just t make it look like they are actually doing something.

meanwhile.. the actual scientists are continuing to work.
Click to expand...

So what, it's 2 meters increase in the sea level in fifteen years?
 
CEngelbrecht said:
So what, it's 2 meters increase in the sea level in fifteen years?
Click to expand...
"head line thinking"
science is not a head line

now your asking a question(another one) thats good.
you need to undertsnad what the answer means when you ask the question by knowing what you wish to achieve by creating the question.

many twist the climate change issue into a game of religious belief
either by media or by power & control.

if you wish to get to the actual science you need to change how you approach the issue and come at it from a scientific perspective.
probably less than 10% of people wish and have the ability to actually do that.
 
RainbowSingularity said:
"head line thinking"
science is not a head line

now your asking a question(another one) thats good.
you need to undertsnad what the answer means when you ask the question by knowing what you wish to achieve by creating the question.

many twist the climate change issue into a game of religious belief
either by media or by power & control.

if you wish to get to the actual science you need to change how you approach the issue and come at it from a scientific perspective.
probably less than 10% of people wish and have the ability to actually do that.
Click to expand...

Are you high or something?
 
my current guess is around 1 cm per year sea level rise at an average with an additional potential exponential compounding effect as the water level gets higher as it warms faster.
on the first look that appears to be nothing to be worried about for many people.
however, historic records clearly show sudden tipping points where total global climate change has suddenly happened over an extremely short period of time.
time wise that is around rough memory a 1000 year time period where the climate has gone from current to having both north and south pole completely melted.
the sudden melt periods suggest to run into maybe 100 years entire "countrys"(by our current understanding)have been submerged.

where that tipping point is they are not soo sure on.

what the primary issue is, is the precipitation level that is currently being seen world wide with flooding from heavy rain.
that suggests to be what is to be expected as a norm and thus gradualy getting worse as time goes on.
RATHER than flooding being occasional...

civil engineering needs to be used to start building large drainage around flood plane housing.
but they wont. not in the usa where they dont act as a government to protect the citizens.
nothing pro-active will be done.(unles there is a change in the culture of how leaders are selected and what they are forced to do by the citizens).
though democratic will of th epeople seems to not be upheld democratically soo much.
and since the entire debate has been turned into a fight between scientists and the god(deliberately)
that change is unlikely to come until there is considerable large scale suffering.

that is the current situation for the usa.

the rest of the world are moving slowly. very slowly.
better slow than not at all i guess.

appologies for poor gramer and typos.
not going to edit.
 
CEngelbrecht said:
Somebody told me, that drilled ice cores show that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere around the beginning of the industrial revolution was 280ppm. Today, what with increased consumption of fossil fuels, the number is 400ppm.
I've also been told, that a number above 600ppm CO2 in a work place without proper ventilation will start to give you coordination and concentration issues.
And I've also been told, that if we continue to consume fossil fuels as we have so far, also now that China and India wants to join the consumer party, we'd reach a number of 900ppm CO2.

So my question is... Are we gonna be a planet of zombies when we reach the year 2100?
Click to expand...
Nope. Just a planet full of people who are warmer and experiencing different weather than they are used to.
 
sideshowbob said:
Construction boom.
Click to expand...

you make a good point in 3 ways
1 the government never plan ahead, so any construction will only be after all the death and damage has been done and the amount the government spend is never the full cost and never has any redundency built in and never equals the current total need and never balances to the previous total loss.
2 the government waits for private insurance to short change and undercut the existing value and then wait a little more until the insurance company has devalued the item for private profit.
3 when everyone except the working class tax payer is making money off it as the working class get health & retirement services taken off them to give to insurance companys as profit cost sharing and then hand bail-outs to corporates the economy is undermined deliberately and directly by those leaders.

on the other hand totally impressed with TRUMPs' tarrifs.
i thought he would never do it.
but he did.

now all the corporates are whining through their manufacturers(looking for little jonny farmer boy to put on TV & have a cry for their corporate suit wearing economy short sellers), AFTER they have moved their head offices into tax havens and outsourced all their labour costs to 3rd world countrys with no health and saftey or workers rights.
 
from greenhouse studies:
CO2, which is also involved in photosynthesis, is also essential for plant growth but there is a threshold of how much your garden will use. Ambient levels of CO2 hover around 400-500 ppm. When you increase that level to around 1,000-1,500 ppm, you will see an increase in your yields and your plants will be much healthier. If the level is allowed to rise to 2,000 ppm or higher, you will begin to see negative effects such as CO2 burn. It is best not to allow your CO2 levels to increase this high.
Click to expand...

https://www.maximumyield.com/what-a...pplied-to-a-plant-before-destroying-it/7/2610
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top