Rigby5
Diamond Member
That argument logically makes no sense.
Let's say humans didn't even exist.
If the planet, through natural processes, started producing more Co2, then what, would that be bad? Would it then "accumulate?"
What if there were a particularly long stretch of droughts that caused a series of catastrophic wildfires around the globe, at the same time several super volcanoes erupted?
Then what?
I guess that is fine, because that would be "natural Co2," and the planet could tell the difference, right? It would maintain balance, as long as it is not human produced Co2.
Wrong.
There always are massive temporary CO2 sources and that is not bad because plants simply become more abundant.
It only when you massively increase CO2 continually, while massively reducing trees and ocean fauna, that there becomes a serious imbalance.
And if there were no humans, then I simply would not care if the planet heats up unbearably.
The only thing I care about is that massive heating from excess CO2 would cost human society, huge financial losses.
We would all have to move and there would be far less land mass to move to.