OT: Texas to EPA: "That stinks"

snipped-for-privacy@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@manx.misty.com:

Sine this has now become a Real Science Usenet Group (RSUG), let me state that such is indeed the case. CO2 gets generated (by many different processes) and consumed (also by many different process). These cycles are more or less in equilibrium, so that the flux through all the ccles combined used to keep the CO2 concentration more or less the same. The question is whether our human generation of CO2 through burning of fossil fuel (not the only human process) is so great that it throws the equilibrium off. Many scientists say yes, a few no. Many here in this RSUG say no, some yes. Maybe my grandchildren will later on be able to answer for sure, in hindsight.

Now for a different aspect of climate. It has been said that recent great earth quakes (China, Haiti, Chile) have altered the stance of the earth's axis. Did this increase the expected severity of winters and summers?

Reply to
Han
Loading thread data ...

snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

No, that's not CO2's MO at all. CO2 will *not* cause you to get sleepy (it is quite unlike CO). It'll do the exact opposite. You will become hyper, gasping for air, and BREAK THINGS to get less of it. Try holding your breath to see what CO2 poisoning is like. CO2 euthanization would be quite cruel, so no I don't believe you.

Reply to
keith

I assure you BHO will not suffer privation, come what may.

Reply to
RBnDFW

keith wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@d8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com:

Soory Keith: CO2 inhalation is the most common method of euthanasia used for mice and rats. A few important aspects of this procedure are:

This a quote from here:

formatting link
Case Western is a reputable school. We do similarly at our medical school (Weill Cornell Medical College).

Reply to
Han

Correct. But so is global cooling.

You were okay until the last sentence. There is absolutely no proof that increased CO2 contributes to global warming. In fact, just the opposite may very well be true: Global warming causes an increase in CO2.

False as to fact. The cost of dealing with global warming is easily offset by the value of global warming (i.e., longer growing seasons and less weather-related deaths). Meanwhile the cost of attempting to offset GW is astronomical.

Because there is no unequivocal evidence that carbon emissions have anything to do with GW.

Look up the definition of the word "belief." Never mind, I'll do it for you:

Belief - Confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof; confidence; faith; trust; a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith.

In other words, GW enthusiasts hold to a premise with a religious fervor marked by trust and faith but not susceptible to proof.

Sounds about right to me.

Reply to
HeyBub

really? how about volcanic eruptions?

Reply to
chaniarts

snipped-for-privacy@d8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com:

That's just torturing the poor critters. Hypobaric chambers would be far more humane.

Reply to
keith

keith wrote in news:5a1f6aff-c6fa-46d7-a54b- snipped-for-privacy@l14g2000yql.googlegroups.com:

I guess you have never observed it.

Reply to
Han

"chaniarts" wrote in news:i3pkpc$spk$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal- september.org:

What about them? Volcanism is considered to have caused CO2 accumulations in the geological record, with accompanying climate change. If you mean current and recent (last several 1000 years) volcanic activity, then tell how and what it does?

Reply to
Han

volcanos spew megatons of co2 into the atmosphere. your statement, that you trimmed, was

volcanos disprove your statement, since they are not part of the cycles, and don't keep the concentration "more or less the same".

Reply to
chaniarts

Everybody get the memo? The last ice age is over and there has been warming ever since. THAT is not the issue. The issue is the claim that catastrophic climate change is going to happen if the massive "cap and trade" scheme is not implemented immediately. THAT is where the politics and falsehoods lie.

Great! It's just too bad that science isn't decided by a popular vote. It's not even decided by a vote of scientists!

Reply to
Benj

snipped-for-privacy@d8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com:

Oh My GAWD! You are MURDERING AMINALS in your labs. Don't you know that a mouse is a rat is a boy? Maybe Keith can send some PETA members over to "free" your animals before you use them to cure disease or something destructive to the planet like that!

Reply to
Benj

Benj wrote in news:8dadfe39-4cbc-4311-888d- snipped-for-privacy@w30g2000yqw.googlegroups.com:

It's a free country, Benj! At least, here it is. You can believe whatever you want to. FWIW, I believe the evidence I have seen and heard that we humans are increasing the CO2 content of the atmosphere and that such an increase leads (has led) to warmer temperatures, globally.

YMMV! Stay cool.

Reply to
Han

"chaniarts" wrote in news:i3pps0$jt5$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-september.org:

Sorry, I disagree. Unless you can show that since about 1800 volcanoes spewing CO2 has increased compared to the average over 1000s of years before 1800. The volcanoes have always been part of the equilibrium of the cycles. Except for those periods (whenever that was in geologic time) that volcanoes were much more active.

Reply to
Han

pic:

formatting link
_World's Oldest Oil Spills: Asphalt 'Volcanoes'_

"THE GIST

  • The "asphalt volcanoes" were found 700 feet down off the shores of southern California. * The asphalt is at least 35,000-years-old and may contain remains of ancient organisms. * Massive and deadly eruptions of methane probably accompanied the asphalt."
Reply to
Oren

Let me strangle you and see if you drift off into a peaceful sleep. The same biological mechanism is triggered. It *IS* torture.

Reply to
krw

innews: snipped-for-privacy@d8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com:

here:

formatting link
>

Clueless.

Reply to
krw

Got it. Do you have proof for the claims you make above? Or are we talking belief?

-- Doug

Reply to
Douglas Johnson

Over 9000 Phd's say not so

formatting link
Atmospheric, environmental, and Earth sciences includes 3,805 scientists trained in specialties directly related to the physical environment of the Earth and the past and current phenomena that affect that environment. 1. Atmosphere (579) I) Atmospheric Science (112) II) Climatology (39) III) Meteorology (343) IV) Astronomy (59) V) Astrophysics (26)

Reply to
Slim

It was Ivan who said AGW is a belief system.

I was simply agreeing with the part:

"Yeah, there are some scientists who don't believe. There always are, always have been, and always will be--and that's good, because the whole point of science is informed skepticism. But more of them -- especially those who specialize in climate -- do."

Again, he's the one who said AGW is a belief system.

Reply to
HeyBub

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.