I'm not hearing much about global warming now days.

[zubenelgenubi]

Being a stable compound is not a benefit.

Any other chemistry you'd care to discuss?

Depends on the application. Stable compounds do not interact with other elements and compounds very easily. I brought up the stability of cfc's to explain the fact that their concentration in the stratosphere is not expected to decrease for a very long time.

 

[Non sequitur]

Cricket's

 

[rod]

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

When all the bees are killed off by mankind's environmental follies, we will all starve to death.

Plants will evolve to be pollinated by the flies that flourish reproducing in our rotting flesh.

It's the pestilence as foretold in the good book!

This is the end times!
Only Jebus can save you!
Repent!

 

[Netsua 3:16]

You understand that life wouldn't exist without carbon dioxide, right? Carbon dioxide is not poisonous, that's why I asked for clarification about your word choice.

Even cfc's are extremely stable compounds. Their concentration in the stratosphere is not expected to start dropping for another 30 to 50 years, as such, according to cfc ozone depleting theory, the ozone should still be in as bad of shape as it was in the 80's, or worse. Any other poisons you care to discuss?

Again, I'm no expert, no genius, BUT I did major in journalism and have breifly studied this topic in the past. I DO know that C02 levels have skyrocketed since the start of the industrial revolution. Sure, C02 is necessary, but burning fossil fuels have blasted it into UNNATURAL levels.....and you can't prove to me that the current level of C02 in the atmosphere is anything but bad. Scientists all over the world who have spent their life studying this specific field say we need to chop it down.

 

[BrownArmy]

You understand that life wouldn't exist without carbon dioxide, right? Carbon dioxide is not poisonous, that's why I asked for clarification about your word choice.

Even cfc's are extremely stable compounds. Their concentration in the stratosphere is not expected to start dropping for another 30 to 50 years, as such, according to cfc ozone depleting theory, the ozone should still be in as bad of shape as it was in the 80's, or worse. Any other poisons you care to discuss?

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

Come again.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Again, I'm no expert, no genius, BUT I did major in journalism and have breifly studied this topic in the past. I DO know that C02 levels have skyrocketed since the start of the industrial revolution. Sure, C02 is necessary, but burning fossil fuels have blasted it into UNNATURAL levels.....and you can't prove to me that the current level of C02 in the atmosphere is anything but bad. Scientists all over the world who have spent their life studying this specific field say we need to chop it down.

You need to study more. CO2 levels have been much higher in the past under NATURAL conditions. Going from 200 ppm to 450 pmm over 150 years is not exactly "skyrocketing". You labor under the fallacious reasoning that experts are infallible, which is understandable. It's easier to be told what to think than to go to the effort of gaining understanding of a complex issue.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

Come again.

Which part is wrong? Plants require CO2 to grow/live, proven fact, self-evident really. Animals require plants to live both for the oxygen they expel, and for food sources. Only very little animal life exists outside of the carbon cycle.

CFCs are very stable, otherwise they would breakdown before reaching the stratosphere. Much like the hcl off-gassed from the oceans, which would theoretically create the same problems with the ozone if it ever made it up to the stratosphere, but it doesn't. I'd say nice try, but it doesn't take any effort to repeat the same word three times. Oddly enough it's about the same amount of effort required to demonstrate your complete lack of understanding of a subject.

Btw, nothing I wrote in that post suggests anything about what side of the argument I align with, and is all based on current understanding of and claims being made by the very experts @Netsua 3:16 puts his faith in. So, saying that I am wrong is disagreeing with the very people you rely on to tell you what to think.

 

[Netsua 3:16]

You need to study more. CO2 levels have been much higher in the past under NATURAL conditions. Going from 200 ppm to 450 pmm over 150 years is not exactly "skyrocketing". You labor under the fallacious reasoning that experts are infallible, which is understandable. It's easier to be told what to think than to go to the effort of gaining understanding of a complex issue.



Which part is wrong? Plants require CO2 to grow/live, proven fact, self-evident really. Animals require plants to live both for the oxygen they expel, and for food sources. Only very little animal life exists outside of the carbon cycle.

CFCs are very stable, otherwise they would breakdown before reaching the stratosphere. Much like the hcl off-gassed from the oceans, which would theoretically create the same problems with the ozone if it ever made it up to the stratosphere, but it doesn't. I'd say nice try, but it doesn't take any effort to repeat the same word three times. Oddly enough it's about the same amount of effort required to demonstrate your complete lack of understanding of a subject.

Btw, nothing I wrote in that post suggests anything about what side of the argument I align with, and is all based on current understanding of and claims being made by the very experts @Netsua 3:16 puts his faith in. So, saying that I am wrong is disagreeing with the very people you rely on to tell you what to think.

That's a big reach. Instead of analyzing me I think you should stick to the topic

 

[Netsua 3:16]

How the World Passed a Carbon Threshold and Why It Matters

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.in...auna-loa-observatory-hawaii-a8337921.html?amp

The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere just hit its highest level in 800,000 years, and scientists predict deadly consequences

ESRL Global Monitoring Division - Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network

 

[zubenelgenubi]

That's a big reach. Instead of analyzing me I think you should stick to the topic

You brought yourself up as a topic of discussion when you stated your credentials, as if they were meant to help strengthen your argument. I understand being faced with hard truths about yourself can be difficult, but it is the first step in making necessary changes for a brighter future.

 

[Netsua 3:16]

A simple Google search will yield you plenty of detractors. I know, I know, David Icke told you that Google is controlled by the lizard people who are executing Agenda 21....
i don't trust everything I read, in fact I'm skeptical of everything I read. I just collect as much data as possible and use reason to formulate my opinions. Has nothing to do with being controlled by MK Ultra and too stupid to make independent decisions

 

[Netsua 3:16]

You brought yourself up as a topic of discussion when you stated your credentials, as if they were meant to help strengthen your argument. I understand being faced with hard truths about yourself can be difficult, but it is the first step in making necessary changes for a brighter future.

Lol what credentials? That I majored in journalism and studied the topic? I don't have a degree. It's called being honest amd humble dude. Focus on the topic

 

[zubenelgenubi]

How the World Passed a Carbon Threshold and Why It Matters

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/environment/carbon-dioxide-concentration-atmosphere-highest-level-800000-years-mauna-loa-observatory-hawaii-a8337921.html?amp

The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere just hit its highest level in 800,000 years, and scientists predict deadly consequences

ESRL Global Monitoring Division - Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network

Business insider sounds like a good source for scientific information. The ice caps were expected to be melted and many coastal cities under water by the time we reached 400 ppm. That didn't happen. Isn't even close to happening. Climate scientists have consistently given the world ten years to shape up for forty years now. The reality has yet to meet the projections. How long does this have to continue before you are willing to question the claims?

 

[Netsua 3:16]

Business insider sounds like a good source for scientific information. The ice caps were expected to be melted and many coastal cities under water by the time we reached 400 ppm. That didn't happen. Isn't even close to happening. Climate scientists have consistently given the world ten years to shape up for forty years now. The reality has yet to meet the projections. How long does this have to continue before you are willing to question the claims?

I question everything....everything. Where's your data proving that the ice caps were supposed to be melted at 400? And why would anybody think that when the co2 levels during the ice age were like 5000

 

[floridays]

Lets all run out and buy electric vehicles

You first.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

A simple Google search will yield you plenty of detractors. I know, I know, David Icke told you that Google is controlled by the lizard people who are executing Agenda 21....
i don't trust everything I read, in fact I'm skeptical of everything I read. I just collect as much data as possible and use reason to formulate my opinions. Has nothing to do with being controlled by MK Ultra and too stupid to make independent decisions

So, it's ok for you to imply that I'm a conspiracy nut, but I can't straight up tell you that you need more information? I don't care if you think I'm crazy. You can't confute my arguments.

 

[floridays]

Again, I'm no expert, no genius, BUT I did major in journalism and have breifly studied this topic in the past. I DO know that C02 levels have skyrocketed since the start of the industrial revolution. Sure, C02 is necessary, but burning fossil fuels have blasted it into UNNATURAL levels.....and you can't prove to me that the current level of C02 in the atmosphere is anything but bad. Scientists all over the world who have spent their life studying this specific field say we need to chop it down.

Journalism major you say? Hilarious.

 

[Netsua 3:16]

So, it's ok for you to imply that I'm a conspiracy nut, but I can't straight up tell you that you need more information? I don't care if you think I'm crazy. You can't confute my arguments.

I don't think you're crazy, I'm not one to completely dismiss any conspiracy theory. Except the lizard people thing, that's retarded. I like a lot of what Icke had to say though. Haven't read any of his books but I've watched a couple of his seminars on YouTube
Links or your argument didn't happen

 

[zubenelgenubi]

I don't think you're crazy, I'm not one to completely dismiss any conspiracy theory. Except the lizard people thing, that's retarded. I like a lot of what Icke had to say though. Haven't read any of his books but I've watched a couple of his seminars on YouTube
Links or your argument didn't happen

Here's the problem with the internet and climate science, when claims made twenty years ago turn out to not be true, they can get buried, or even disappear. The only sources that keep some of these alive online are ones that could be seen as agenda driven. I found a couple articles, one from natgeo (Climate Milestone: Earth’s CO2 Level Passes 400 ppm), that references the fact that the last time the atmospheric concentrations were at 400 ppm, sea levels were something like 30 feet higher than now, and the Earth was in an interglacial period. It's likely that someone based a prediction of ice caps melting on that information.

If I stumble upon the original claims, I will post links.

 

[floridays]

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

Come again.

Present an argument to 2033, @BrownArmy , wrong, wrong, wrong is not a reply. Come again, is a loser as a rebuttal. You have no substance and can't relate to that level of discussion, Try again?