What does CC really mean?

donttread

Gold Member
Oct 30, 2008
400
253
193
I have no problem believin that the earth's climate is changing, in fact I think it pretty much always is. Where I happen to live the warming then pause then maybe warming again scenario has played out in my lifetime since the hard ass winters of the 60's to the much lighter winters of the 80's and 90's to winters somewhere inbetween since.
I accept that the planet is changing and we certainly could be part of that. My question is : So what?
Plants love higher CO2 concentrations in the air
We can almost certainly produce strains of staple crops that can handle the heat.
While sometimes seas become desserts the over riding principal is that a warmer world= a wetter world
Even if some crop land is rendered non commercially viable by CC it is likely that at least that much land to the north and south will become commerically farmable.

So what it the big deal so to speak? That leaves rising seas which are only a factor in limited areas and we have time to adapt to.

Where am I wrong here?
 
I don't think the CC hysteria is about science and global changes, it's about politics and redistribution of wealth. All of the estimates of how much warming will take place have been wrong for more than 30 years, and nobody really knows how much the planet really is warming up and how much of that is due to anthropogenic activity. IOW, us. Nor does anyone have any idea how much of a difference it would make to the amount of CC if we did spend all that gobs of money to implement the GND. The US is already leading the world in reducing CO2, does anyone think the Russians, Chinese, Indians, and the other polluters around the world are going to spend loads of money to change their ways? We're talking tens of trillions of dollars that might not solve the problem, isn't that kinda stupid?
 
I have no problem believin that the earth's climate is changing, in fact I think it pretty much always is. Where I happen to live the warming then pause then maybe warming again scenario has played out in my lifetime since the hard ass winters of the 60's to the much lighter winters of the 80's and 90's to winters somewhere inbetween since.
I accept that the planet is changing and we certainly could be part of that. My question is : So what?
Plants love higher CO2 concentrations in the air
We can almost certainly produce strains of staple crops that can handle the heat.
While sometimes seas become desserts the over riding principal is that a warmer world= a wetter world
Even if some crop land is rendered non commercially viable by CC it is likely that at least that much land to the north and south will become commerically farmable.

So what it the big deal so to speak? That leaves rising seas which are only a factor in limited areas and we have time to adapt to.

Where am I wrong here?
the earth has been warming every year since the peak of the ice age and will continue until the next one,,

the hysterical people shouting climate change are either frauds getting rich off of it or people worried about themselves and think they can control anything related to mother nature,,
 

What does CC really mean?​

Closed Captioned? Carbon Copy?

I have no problem believin that the earth's climate is changing,
I hope so because it has been constantly changing for 4.5 billion years.

I accept that the planet is changing and we certainly could be part of that. My question is : So what?
That just makes us one more factor in the equation of the climate since we are part of nature and everything we are doing is natural and expected for an emerging technologically advanced species. In other words, nature does not expect us to go directly from fires in caves to hydrogen fuel cells and nuclear fusion.

Plants love higher CO2 concentrations in the air
They do, but while more CO2 is plant food, too much CO2 actually reduces nitrogen levels in what we eat making it less nutritious for us.
 
Closed Captioned? Carbon Copy?


I hope so because it has been constantly changing for 4.5 billion years.


That just makes us one more factor in the equation of the climate since we are part of nature and everything we are doing is natural and expected for an emerging technologically advanced species. In other words, nature does not expect us to go directly from fires in caves to hydrogen fuel cells and nuclear fusion.


They do, but while more CO2 is plant food, too much CO2 actually reduces nitrogen levels in what we eat making it less nutritious for us.
But how high would CO2 need to get to produce that nitrogen effect. There is also a whole industry pretty much devoted to adding nutrients including nitrogen? I wonder if there might be a microbal approach?
 
Except if man rips out thousands of acres of rain forest each day. Don't get me wrong, I agree with the OP 100%, but I can't help but think that the decimation of the rain forests has probably the most profound effect on the CO2 problem.

Well it certainly doesn't help. Less forest means less trees to take up the excess CO2 in the atmosphere, though let's face it, it is only up to something like 300-400 ppm-- -- about 1/2500th of the air we breathe or about 0.0004%, it is still a minor greenhouse gas which is a trace element in our air. But another concern would be the RATE of change--- it has been higher in the past but may have taken far longer to change that way.
 
Credit Card? Like the porn sites that say "No cc required". At least that's what I've heard they say.
 

Forum List

Back
Top