Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="zubenelgenubi" data-source="post: 3285765" data-attributes="member: 63706">I guess I'm missing something here. Hydrocarbons we refer to as fossil fuels theoretically derive from living organic material. So how would they not be considered natural? I think they should be distinguishing between modern and ancient carbon sources. (Edit: upon further research I found that they are differentiating between CO2 preferred by biological sources, and CO2 released by geological processes, so it's not just fossil fuel burning, but all biological sources of CO2. The question I have now is why is the CO2 from geoligical sources decreasing?) Unless they are using the abiotic oil theory, in which case they should not refer to it as fossil fuel. This data also seems to suggest that if we weren't burning fossil fuels, atmospheric CO2 may have dropped to dangerously low levels.</blockquote>